The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1934-06-14

opposed, he wasn't asking Vogel.
was done. II he was a human polly
wog there would not be this continus
publicity about Bill LANCER. He woul
be stepped on. Because Of his activit
and his character, because Of his spirit
Of bigness and greatness he likewis
attracts monumental criticism"
Concluding his discourse on tn
LANCER character. Thorp next referre'
tu the governors part in securing
federal relief funds for the state,
Signed Application Himself
Nov, they say in the indictment,
he pointed out. that he danger
signed the applications. But he him
self signed. That was not conspir'
acy."
| With q few additional remarks or
how the governor had surrendered ont
OF the most wonderful practices in thu
state Ito take public office ThorI
directed his arguments to facts from
the evidence in the case.
| Thorp referred to the discharge oil
Giles Personals, an employe of the
state highway department. "Vogel
said he discharged him for the good
of the department. What do you
gentlemen do In your organization?
A man may have good ability but he
can't cooperate. He argues too much
-. He is disrupting- you try to be
fair but finally you say, Let's let the
man CO.
What would you think OF Vogel il
he didn't do that? Is 1t conceivable
that because he works for the state
that he has not the ambition to be a
good highway man-to be efficient In
the direction of his organization"
Testimony OF George Hepner, form
err engineer for the state highway de-
partment. next came under Thorp's
vocal scalpel.
Look at Hepner-the government
brought in a letter; the first one men
toned cooperation. The government
inferred that he wanted Hepner to CO.
operate with Mcdonald, and yet in
October, another letter was sent by
Vogel to Hepner, critisizing him. Dave
Hamilton tells you Hepher was good
engineer but he couldn't get along.
Hamilton was defense witness.
Then Vogel calls in Hepner and
tells him I can't use you at Minot but
I'm going to try to put you some
where else That's the evidence.
Poor Old Frank Vogel
Then we have Flagg .John Flagg
highway department employe for
whom the prosecution claims salary
raise was declared to take care of a
Leader contribution Flagg couldn't
pay his bills; his creditors were after
him: they were complaining to poor
old Frank Vogel that one of his boys
couldn't pay his bills.
"Vogel called him in and told him
of a $3.50 bill and said. I'll raise your
salary to take care of the bills. And
that's used to condemn Frank Vogel
because he lifted Flagg to SIS and
again to 500 a month
The testimony Of Mrs. Edith Scott,
who the prosecution asserts received
a salary cut because she refused to
pay a contribution for The Leader"
was next to be discussed by Thorp.
She is undoubtedly nice little
lady. They (the prosecution showed
she had cut. Showed she worked in
the federal relief administration. They
said Kinzer raised and lowered checks
to show conspiracy in which he had
INDUCED although there was nothing
to show he knew anything about the
newspaper until Mcdonald came to
him.
Mcdonald said she asked him not
to have her work overtime. She said
she didn't want to work overtime. She
could not take dictation, and she
wasn't as valuable as the other girls. y
Thorp related humorous story
Larier had used to illustrate a point
in his argument. in which a smaller
fish had been replaced for larger
fish
Who knows-Who is there to say
Lanier didn't take both fish,
Mcdonald Blundered Into Office
MRS. Craig says she knew of no
pressure. she says she did not see Nc
Donald do anything when he blum
dered into the place-because he did
blunder into the relief office
so they must be mistaken when
they say that Kinzer saw the COVER
nor. because he didn't see the COVER
nor-he saw Stangler They'd have
you believe that BY reason Of what
Kinzer did the employees We're afraid
not to contribute.
1T wasn't Kinzer-it was the news
papers-the opposition press-Bllls
enemies-who claimed they would lose
their jobs if they did not contribute
On completion of Thorp's plea to
the jury. Harry LashkoWltz. assistant
to the district attorney, opened the
last argument to be made before the
judges charge.
He termed the case "one Of the most
important pieces OF litigation ever
tried in the United States
Mindful. am l." he said, that
state officials OF your state and my
state have corruptly administered acts
of your country and my country.
know that there have been indul-
gences III pathoS and jests-to me
this is one of the most serious mat
tiers have had the privilege Of taking
part in"
Not a Crime Of S179.5O
Then pointing to the defense claims
that the allegations against the de-
PENDANTS involve solicitation Of $l79.5O
from federal workers, LashkoWitz
raised hts voice to tell the jury This
is not a crime that involves $l79.50,
but crime that goes to the very roots
of this government.
He referred to a statement made
previously to the jury by District At
torney p. w. Lanier. that the "eyes
Of the nation are upon you." q state
ment which drew fire from defense
II agree with my illustrious chief"
said LaShkowitz. when he says that"
Tho affa,,eA aOoi,oct 1ooCor orA 1,is