Show to the P public ulc to often are the acts of nien both in private and public life ife 1 1 1 condemned by the people e r who 0 centuries bea beffie oi e they have in investigated vesti gated the whys ghys and wherefores f ores and the circumstances F par ar rounding those acts more eslieb bially does this criticism fall ion on those who have been chosen to jo h serve the public I 1 think ita reasonable and a I 1 I 1 just conclusion that before iny any one can I 1 intelligently pile r re e I 1 t proof to a public ser servant or cpr for their acts with any degree of certainty that they tire are right they should f lyst first acquaint themselves with the facts sa rounding the transact transaction tion but v realizing that many abil gs 4 take lie ila lace e which the public has a 9 right to know and unless they do 0 know their conclusions are liable to be erroneous and aa j I 1 Ive very DyVA unjust As an 0 officer b both cf f the county and thi this city I 1 would lik like e to see ee it all 11 the f acts actkin i in which the people has an interest made public by printing them in same p paper fp 0 which V I 1 h tb the e p people e lave bave access wid and then when I 1 the lie people find that an officer ha has betrayed his public trust lot let him know know in no un uncertain certain i ivay way hat he had better resign h epa a public officer tries to hide his official acts arts it is bound to call sem mistrust ri st ands and suspicion uspicio n 1 th afave ave been requested to e explain x aja why the case against 11 M kayne and chas Eram brampton Kr ampton liton waa x as dismissed this was a matter jn in which the public was verb ver much inte interested rested as the present admi ad mi ini are pledged to aig huab the liquory liquor sel selling ling in thia crisand cri yand r d ap tio d doubt tildy watch afe h 1 wi til interest antee st eases cases of this char tr actor 1 I iam ia m pleased to U give hc be an fn acts surrounding t this nis case to tf fyie iv bolic pu 0 r any case which con concerns arns the p public u jid th through h je coloms of 0 this p per if inthey thay will give r space pace to the silme same T the 4 jollow following ingis is the way ta evidon ce which came to me on the alst day of april last the mayor of this city 0 overheard ve a conversation bation between mr jog JOB Vs whitaker fiaker and bird oboth bothof of kanosh to this effect mr WI said to mr air B abdon BD dont on ct you want something to tb take home with you mr B said yes b but U i t this is a d dry ry to town n and J c can n fc got it mr W said that dint 4 r lie he knew how to get it a and n d went i diiro across 59 to the saloon ar r stevens foli followed owed and took f hs his stand in the barber shop he saw from thes the shop bop window mr fa V aiom come e out of the back door of 1 the saloon mr 1 ajr charles charle s fram framp p ton ion clos closed edthe the door doo after him ba I 1 Y mr 1 r W joined mr NJ r 13 and as s they were ae leaving the town j lr r i K H A fram Framp eption tion and the mayor i overtook them and found flav i or y in in the W wagon agon mr stevens told mr W that chat he had heard the s conversation had between hini him and M mr r B and saw him go to and saloon and come out and that he be knew that he had got the liquor there and that he wanted him to tb sign a statement the statement stat emeil t was read over to mr W a number i of times A at his request after which he signed it the statement wit was s signed ady y three citizens as witnesses and was ws in words and figures as follows I 1 april this isto is to certify that abas frampton sold to me 4 4 pt fco ties of brandy on this the he day of f april A april 1910 in fillmore city in parley M paynes saloon J C whitaker witness daniel Ste yens bird birdea EA bi Pr rampton ampton I 1 Bele iving M mr taber would stand by what hs ho had bad signed in t the h p presence of f three others and testify to the same same on the witness stand standa as beai being ng true I 1 entertain edthe eds case e I 1 want to be fair to a all 1 i t the a r t 4 1 e s c concerned 0 n c e r n in this action and will state what mr whitaker tolo me he said that he got the liquor at nir mr paynes saloon but thatis that it was vas liquor winch which he had burh ased some time in march before the saloon had bad closed he cor rob rated d I 1 mr fr at elevens evens Rs as to the conversation b behind the st oreas did mr bird but that when he we went rit over to the saloan he be found out alf that he could not get any n y liquor for mr bird so he nad ad i i i to fco take his own owna which he llad had stored there before the sal saloons 0 ons had closed down when c con on 1 f fronted with the f fact act that he had signed a statement saying that he had purchased liquor on the day ota I 1 april ayi srbui mr r crampon he said that h e was excite dand that ns i wife tal gojii him that lie e had bad vette better r si sin ap and that mx mr md bird said fi was he best H av fi he e alp alio I 1 stated that h t f he 1 aid not gietl the ibe sl td ift taftt W aou would db have dir to go X b back ck W 1 6 aill more and anskeit answer to 0 it a char charge geda 1 df in Fill fillmore mord city which was against the law the above lvove are facts as they were told to meby me by those mentioned in the writing and I 1 am giving them without argument as to the merits of the case or the guilt or inu cense of the defendants fend ants or whether mr whitaker hedged in favor falur of the defendants fend ants or not those are the facts a and nd the people can draw their own conclusions if the i paper will M give 1 I v e in mo a space I 1 would eke I 1 ke to add that loftt anes we hoar hear on our streets expressions like this there is is enough evidence to convict any one abne I 1 would convict N brict general prin cipala 11 I 1 want ant to say this that there is a vast difference in convicting a man on our street evidence and before judge and jury tind and the cold techin cali ties of the law when it cot comes nes t to 0 a matter of opinion I 1 am with you Inbe in reliving living be that there alre are to many technicalities which chic idgie biye to much latitude for to equable and to often def defeats bftts tb the e very purpose for which law labb lire are enacted ane afie very fact that we are not all acquainted with tb the e rules which govern the of evidence causes erroneous ideas and those hea hear rs says ay s remote conversations qu out t of the presence of the I 1 defendant alad and uncertainties which we have based our belief of a conviction on would bo ruled out of court now in the case mentioned in writing we would not p put ut in the conversation mr stevens heard as against against t the defendants as it was hearsay ond nd as to the statement signed by mr na r whitaker that could not be put in as MY mr whitaker is tle the best evidente evi denpe himself and it itis s a general rule that a party can ili his s own witness and when he puts a ai witness thess on the stand he viii vouches e b for his truthfulness for ne is sup supposed posed to know what he will testify to no as soon as wp we were sure I 1 that mr whitaker VV hitaker would not substantiate what he be had signed signe d and that he be being ng the main a and nd only convicting witness ne s s ve gehad had tt it would be folly t to 0 go on with the ease case and spend public funds fund sin in a losing cause I 1 think chave I 1 all in in this case of any importance in ande public bubli C is in possession of gf the facto if anyone finds wherein I 1 h have av e unstated anything egand and tha thy y can show 1 iff what wah t jbf respects A peati W will I 1 11 ayt afy it 1 RW xing King I 1 |