Jasper County Democrat, Volume 13, Number 5, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 23 April 1910 — WHAT’S BEHIND ALL OF THIS? [ARTICLE]

WHAT’S BEHIND ALL OF THIS?

Some “Peculiar” Features of the Bridge Graft Matter. WHO DOTHEY SEEK TO SHIELD? That There Is Something Mighty Rotten That Has Not Yet Come to Light Is Apparent to Those Acquainted With the Disclosed Facts.—Emissaries Sought to Stop Prosecution. There is apparently a whole lot more behind this bridge graft matter in Jasper county than the public at large is aware of, and it looks very much as though a concerted effort was made in certain quarters to shut off the prosecution of C. L. Bader and hush the tiling up before it could reach the public. We are told that an emmissary visited Lafayette som'e time before the grand jury investigated the matter and went to Mr. Marshall of the Lafayette Engineering . Co., whq exposed the steal in the Milroy township bridge, and told him that “neither the court nor the prosecutor wanted to push these charges, and if he would ‘lie down’ it would be the end of it.” This statement was wholly false, as the court and prosecutor have very evidently been in earnest in uncovering the and it does them an injustice for anyone to think otherwise. Marshall told the emissary to go to Halifax, that if the court and prosecutor wished to investigate and bring the case to trial they could depend on him to testify to what he knew; that he was from the “show me” state, and would not believe any such story as was told him. The emissary came home very much disappointed. Next, When tin; November term vof coprt convened and the case was set dowh for trial the latter part of the term, a continuance was granted because “Mr. Bader was in New Orleans” and the associate counsel, Mr. Hathaway, was busy in a big ditch case at Winamac arid could not be here, it was alleged. A short time after this a Rensselaer gentleman met Mr. Bader on a train and the latter came up and talked to him. The R. G. said, “you have got back from New Orleans, I see.” “New Orleans?” Bader replied, with a puzzled look. “Oh yes, I, have been down there several times,” arfd the conversation was switched at once. Then came the trial in February, and Mr. Hathaway was not here at all. The evidence was all one-sided, yet some peculiar thiijgs developed. The court and jury were prejudiced in the defendant’s favor, it seemed until the evidence so clearly established his guilt, and even then they felt very sorry for him. Judge Hanley was so unwilling to send the man to the penitentiary, that he. held back passing sentence Until he had sent out competent men to examine some of the other bridges his company—-which had had practically all the bridge contracts here for the past few years—had erected. Judge Hanley paid out of his own «pocket the man he secured to go out with'the county surveyor on this mission, so loth was he to send the man to prison if this ■ particular bridge was the only one that was short. When the report was brought back that all the bridges measured showed the same general scal r ing down, it convinced the court,, evidently, that a systematic steal was going on in this county in the construction of bridges, and he could no longer conscientiously withold sentence. And then what happened? There was busy work in certain quarters to keep the man out of the pen. The sheriff was prevailed upon to stay at Wina,mac until the governor could be

seen and a reprieve secured! Petitions were hurriedly circulated here and, at Winamac, and about a score of names were gotten here and about fifty at Winamac. None of the jurors who tried the case, we understand, would sign the petitions, although it is alleged some of them were invited to do so. Two of the petitioners, it is alleged, one here, and one at Winamac, were required to sign separate petitions to the governor; that is, their names, it is alleged, were not on the same petition with the others—the governor “tied them up,” it is said. After these petitions were in the governor Issued the parole. What caused him to mix in is not known. He never asked for or received any information from Rensselaer, so far as known, unless it was from those seeking to prevent justice being done. What representations were made to him to induce him to take the. action he did in this case is an unsolved question, but that the matter must have been grossly misrepresented, , we can but believe. Governor Marshall is considered a pretty level-headed man. He is a good lawyer and is opposed to graft or anything that tinges of its taint, yet lie was influenced to set aside, temporarilly at least, the verdict of the jury of twelve good men who heard the evidence, and turn the defendant loose. The governor’s action, we contend, cannot be justified from any point of view. He need not have sent a representative here and found out the facts; could have enquired of people he knew here something of the case. Yet he did nothing of the kind, and his action was not fair to the court, the prosecutor or the jury. What did they tell Governor Marshall ito cause him to take this action, is , a question hundreds of men in Jasper county have asked each other since that time. The man had a fair trial and the evidence was undisputed. Why then should the executive interfere? The interest manifested in certain quarters in defeating the ends of justice iri this matter looks very suspicious, and if it is probed to the bottom there will be some startling developements for the people of Jasper county.