Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 39, Number 35, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 4 January 1907 — Court Of Inquiry Was A Fiasco. [ARTICLE]

Court Of Inquiry Was A Fiasco.

The end of 1906 also ended the first term of office of Prosecuting Attorney Graves and with the end ing of his term also ends the term of his special and regular deputies, including taat of George E. Hersh - man, »f our city who was appointed with a special view of in vestigating certain matters in Remington. Prosecuting Attorney Graves was over there earlier in the year and held a court of inquiry which resulted in bringing some of the boot-legging gentry up with a short turn, which caused them heavy fines and put them out of business. Evidently he found all that there could be found at that time, but ceitain individuals working some of them for political purposes and others merely from spite, raised a great cry that Mr. Graves had from some questionable motives terminated his search after law violators, and claiming that there was plenty of evidence to be obtained against others. This cry was so persistent that many good people over there were more or less misled by it, and they also joined in with the demand that was made for another court of inquiry to be held there by a special prosecute r, and one who not only could not have any political or personal reasons for wishing to shields Mr. Graves, but oa the contrary would have every reason to expose him if ae had been corrupt or di relict in duty. Therefore they asked for the appointment of Mr. Hershman, Mr. Graves Democratic opponent at the election, and who not only had been the intended beneficiary of the injurious statements circulated against Graves during the campaign, but as was generally understood, was quite active himself in their * circulation. Therefore, as may readily be seen, Mr. Hershman had every reason for desiring to make good, by producing he evidence, if any were there to be produced. He therefore held his court of inquiry, or rather courts, for he took two whirls at it, bur those who had urged on the inquiry and talked so confidently, were not therewith the goods when evidence was wanted of boot-legging, gamb ling and other alleged infractions of the law, and especially did they not show up with any which Mr. Graves ought to have found and did not. One affidavit was filed against a resident of Remington charging him with giving liquor to a small boy, causing him to be intoxicated. The boy’s mother, Mrs. Charles Dye signed the affidavit, but when Mr. Dye heard of it he went te the Squire’s office, got hold of the affidavit and tore it in pieces. That was a new way to quash an affidavit, but it seemed to be effectual, for no move seems to have been made to prepare a new one. That none was prepared seems good evidence that there was not much in the case. It w said the boy dropped into the neighbor’s house and was allowed to partake so freely of some sweet wine on the table so that he was made considerably sick and perchance a little boozy. There was also some evidence said to have been presented about some boys tearing up an old board walk that had long outlived its usefulness, in pursuit of rats.