OCR Interpretation


The Alaska citizen. (Fairbanks, Alaska) 1910-1917, September 03, 1917, Image 9

Image and text provided by Alaska State Library Historical Collections

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn96060002/1917-09-03/ed-1/seq-9/

What is OCR?


Thumbnail for

A Mr S: George a*ked me some
f*
know
g S • *ht* whole thing is indefinite,
*«o ini as you’re concerned?
A Am ta: as my recollection serves
rue. the only detinlte proposition was
!i\ * thousand dollars, I am satis
: then was no offer from New
V ork
g Did you make them an oiler
in*- > • -.ii and u half ago to sell
til.- propert> ton me -nouaanu uoi
la is ’
A 1 think that’s tight. \ e.v Later
on *n th» aiu** year when I re
turned to Fairbanks it you wish
I:**- . n iate this had some thought
ui tearing the rmk down and selling
lor w ha material w as in it. and
spoke to Mr. Higgs and he said he
would take all the iron l Han at
••veil hundred dollar*, later on 1
deeded t<> keep it another year.
it for »ix y
ii\»- hundred was because drj lum
ber w;i- v* iy scarce in the camp
and it looked like 1 could clear six
.lOUSUIIU UOUUIS. Ol MlUiar, it
would entail some expense in teur
. ng down and disposing of if
y You keep a set ol books
A Yes, sir.
y in these books do >ou enter
all your business transaction ol that
order?
A Well, the check hook would
show all transaction regarding the
rink, and the bank hook would show
the amount received
y Do you bauk with the First
National hunk?
A. Yes, sir
y Between the books ot the bank !
showing the deposits and checking j
w.thdrawais, and your own books,
all your business transactions would
he shown, would they"
A Yea.
y After you came back from the
east the last lime, Mr Gordon, and
at or about the time the negotiations
were being conducted for the pur
chase of this building, you heard,
did 'on nut. tin- fact or th*- state
ment of fact or rumor ot fact wheth
er a was a fact or not, is not par
ticularly material, this building had
been offered by you for sale for a
price in the neighborhood of two
thousand dollars?
A. Less than that,
y You heard that?
A. Yes.
y. You heard that, and I presume
it was quite general talk?
A. Not generally talked, but 1
heard it stated that the lady in a
meeting of the auxiliary society, the
Red Cross of the Loyal League had
stated at a meeting, she had made |
a statement that it was offered for
twelve hundred dollars; so as a mat
ter of curiosity 1 called the lady
up, she had no phone hut 1 got her
husband on the telephone and asked
if she made the statement, and she
and her husband came down ad stat
ed they hadn't made the statement.
Q. Was that ill's. Clegg?
A. No, sir—do you want—
Q. Yes, if you care to state?
A. It was Mrs, Sea.
Q. You were cognizant of the fact
that Mrs. Clegg had made a state
ment in tin- meeting or after the
adjournment of a meeting in which
she objected strenuously to ibis wo
man's organization fathering or moth
ering this proposition of selling tick
ets for a dance because of the graft
there was in it because the building
had been offered to the Pioneers for
less than two thousand dollars?
A. 1 didn’t know that, no, sir.
y. Your information was the state
ment had been made by Mrs. Sea,
and she disclaimed it?
A. Yes, sir.
y. That came to you from other
sources?
A. No, sir—you mean from Mrs.
Clegg?
Q No, what was said to have been |
stated from Mrs. Sea?
A. Why, the lady come in the
store and said this statement hadn’t j
been made, and that’s all 1 know .
about it.
Re-Direct Examination (By Mr. Pratt)
Q. Of this check you received for
$3,500 you say you gave checks to
Mr. Wood?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Check for twenty-six hundred
and something for a mortgage and
$00 for taxes?
A Yes, sir.
Q. And your donation ’
A. Yes, sir.
Q And didn’t pay any personal
debts?
A. 1 paid a personal debt of three
hundred dollars to Mr. Wood; 1 know
there was very little left when I
got through,
Q That would leave something
like two hundred dollars?
A. Yes, sir.
The Government Rests
Mr. Marquam—If you will just let
me see that mortgage, Mr. Gordon.
(Witness hands paper to Mr. Mar
quam.) That’s all.
DEFENSE
J. H. Caskey, defendant, being first
duly swurn, testified n
Direct Examination (By Mr Mar
quani)
y Mr t ask' -, you ' e the defend
ant in this case’
A Yes. sir
y. And you're the owner and pub
lisher of The Citizen'1
A Yes, sit
y How long have you been op
rating and conducting that paper
A In the neighborhood ol eight
or mm- years as a weekiy . daiiy
since last September.
y iJHily since September Who is
the editor of the paper, Mr Caskey,
ui the present time '
A Well, I'm the editor, 1 have an
editorial writer, but I am the editor
myself.
y Who .3 the editorial writer you
speak of?
A Mi Call Fitchett.
y How long has he been con
nected with the paper?
A Since tile firs! ot the month,
y lie came from tin- Outside with
you. did he?
A 1 brought him in with me, yes.
sir.
y You an- . harged in this com
plaint, being a complaint for crim
inal libel, with having published in
The Citizen an article under the
heading of "Patriotism for Profit"
which appeared in the issue of the
eighth ol the present month. I'll
ask you if that is the article which
you as editor authorized the publica
tion of.’
A Yes, sir.
y Thai's not your writing. - it.
Mr. Caskey.'
A No, ,-ir, it is not.
y It was written by
A It was written by Mr. Kilchett.
y. But for which you're respons
ible?
A. I’m responsible entirely, yes. sir.
Q. Why was that article written'.’
What was the purpose of writing
that editorial? (After argument).
A Why, the object in writing that
editorial was for the purpose of re
futing 01 replying to an editorial
appearing in the News-Miner of the
evening previous. (After motion and
argument)
y 1 will hand you a paper, the
News-Miner of August 7th, U)17,
which has been identified by Mr.
Thompson as an editorial written
and published by him as of that
date, and ask if that is tlie* editorial :
to which the editorial in The Citizen |
of the following day is a reply?
A. It is, yes, sir.
Mr. Marquam—We offer that m
evidence. (Objection, extended argu
ment and adjournment).
Session of August 16th, 1917.
Q. (After ruling on offer of pre
vious session). Mr. Caskey, you tes
tified yesterday that the editorial
which is the basis of this criminal
prosecution was a reply to the arti
cle appearing in the News-Miner of
the night before which was just ad- j
mitted in evidence'.’
A. Yes, sir.
Q. What part of that editorial, if 1
any special part, is it directed to, \
and was the cause of the necessity j
of a reply in your opinion^ (Objec- !
tion and argument).
A. Well, there is one part there
wherein he states that i always op
posed anything that the government
ever done, and where Mr. Thompson
upholds all of their actions with my
opposition.
Q. Had that policy, or similar j
policy with regard to the conduct of 1
yourself in the newspaper business
been promulgated by the News-Miner
prior to that time, or was this the
first instance (After objection and
argument).
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You remember the question?
(Question repeated).
A. Yes, sir.
Q I understand the answer goes
to the fact that same policy had
been pursued prior to that time?
A. Yes, sir.
Q, in the testimony of some of
the witnesses yesterday. Mr. Caskey,
it was stated on the stand, apparent
ly by voluntary statements, but any
how it is in evidence, that The Citi
zen at the time the question of the
purchase of the armory was before
the public, was fighting the proposi
tion—! think that's the way they
used the expression. I'll ask you if
upon the plan that was finally adopt
ed where the business men generally,
whether they were willing or not, or
the public whether they were willing
or not, were not asked to contrib
ute, when those propositions were
dropped, whether or not you ever
had any fight in your paper about
individuals who felt they wanted to
subscribe voluntarily to that propo
sition, whether or not you ever
fought that proposition? (Objection
and argument).
Q. You took the attitude at one
time in the paper at least during the
interim when Mr. Thompson and the
other members of the committee were
proposing to go amongst the people
generally and business men for sub
scriptions or the sale of tickets that
was discussed yesterday, lor tlie pur
pose u! giving .1 ball at live dollars
a iiket, there was a discussion in
you: paper to the effect i think that
.. appeared to you there was a gralt
in the thing where a piece ol prop
erly would be ottered tot sale under
circumstances ol this kind at an ad
lanced price over what it had pre
viously be.-u ottered something to
that effect From what source or
what authority did you get the in
formation tiiat such was the fact?
(After objection and argument) in
tile article which is charged as libel
ous, Mr. Caskey, you ask the ques
tioll, or the writer ol the article
ask- the question directly ot Mr.
Thompson us to whether he will
deny tiiat he got a commission out
ol it, and along that line there were
other articles in the paper not only
litis article, that everything wasn't
right m that deal 111 ask you
from what source you received your
information that led you to adopt
that policy ' (Alter objection and
argument).
A. The discrepancy between the
price offered at and the price, the
purchase price, was discussed at a
meeting of the Woman's Loyal
League m which Mrs. Cecil Clegg
took the stand that it should not be
y. (After objection and argument).
Answer the question -state what the
source was, and the sum and sub
stance ol your information'.’
A. The sum and substance of the
information was
y Who was your informant?
A. Mrs. Fred Lewis and my wife j
in conversation with Mrs. Clegg.
y. All right —that’s the wife of J
Cecil H. Clegg, president ot the Loyal I
League?
A Yes, sir tiiat the property had |
been offered to the trustees of the !
Pioneers for a sum less than two |
thousand dollars.
(j. What else?
A And she objected to the pur
chase of it for live thousand dollars
because she didn't see where profit
should be made out of patriotism.
y. When was that information
brought to you?
A Well, 1 think it was about
since this controversy came up, I J
don’t remember particularly. Well,
it was about -yes -when the article
appeared in the paper or prior to it
appearing in the paper, and that is j
why I asked these questions.
y Was there any other purpose, ^
Air, t.asKuy, in puousmug—in wn.
ing and publishing this editorial
further than to answer the charges
that had been made against you and
showing tile character of the writer
as you believe it to be true of the
person who was making the charge
against you of disloyalty? |
A. There was no other at ail, ex
cept to protect myself and answer |
tne charges made the day previous.
Q. 1 believe you testified yester- |
day that the writer of that article J
was Carl Fitchett, did you not"
A. Yes, sir,
Q. And he is tin- gentleman you
brought in from the Outside as an
editorial writer?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. How long have you be.-n run
ning a newspaper, Mr. Caskey?
A. Well, I have been running a
newspaper of my own here in town
for very nearly nine years, eight
years anyhow.
Q. During all the time you have
been here Mr. Thompson has been
in the newspaper business?
A. He has.
t). And you say, I believe, you
have been editor of The Citizen ever
since, and The Citizen us a daily for
a year and a half?
A. Since last September.
Q- (After withdrawing to look at
records). Now, Mr. Caskey, in re
gard to that statement that you
nave Di-en -contained in tins editori
al which was introduced in evidence
from the News-Miner, that you have
been opposing since the commence
met of the war or since war has
come to America as expressed in
there, everything that the govern
ment has been doing in the way of
preparedness, I’ll ask you to state
whether that statement is true? (Ob
jection sustained). Mr. Caskey, that’s
■ill.
Cross Examination (By Mr. Pratt.)
Q. Bet's see, what is your first
name, Mr. Caskey?
A. James.
Q. James H. Caskey?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You were formerly up in Daw
son, I believe?
A. 1 was.
Q. About the same time Mr. Thomp
son was up there?
A. 1 came there before he did.
Q. And you, like him, while up
there took the oath of allegiance to
Canada?
A. I did not.
Q. Didn’t you take the oath of al
legiance to King Edward the Sev
enth?
A. No, sir. I did not.
Q. Didn't you as a matter of fact,
take the oath of residence and al
leguince in Dawson’
A 1 took the oath ot residence,
y Didn't you alsu lake the oath
ol allegiance?
A No, sir.
y 1 ask you, Mr. Caskey it on
the 13th day ot November, lSldJ, be
fore D Donughey, u commissioner
tor the taking oi ailidavits in and
for the Yukon Territory, you didn’t
sign and swear to the following uf
llduvit under the naturalization act
of Canada, VsSl . (K*-ada oath of al
legiance). riigued James H. Caskey,
sworn to before me at Dawson, Yu
kon Territory. D. Donughey. com
missioner for the taking of ailidavits
in and for Yukon Territory. Didn’t
you sign that’.’ (Demand for in
spection ot document, and argument)
I’m asking if you didn’t make that
affidavit at the time in Dawson"
A 1 refuse to answer until I see
it. (Argument).
Mr. Marquam- You can look at it,
Mr Caskey—did you read the second
page of it?
A No, 1 didn't know there was a
second page to it (Hands to wit
ness).
y Examine the document oareful
ly and see if you recognize it—take
your time. (Witness hands paper to
Mr. Pratt).
By Mr. Pratt Now do you remem
ber, Mr. Caskey, didn't you sign
the oath of allegiance 1 read to
you?
A. 1 signed something of that kind;
I understood it was an oath of resi
dence, instead of an oath of alle
giance.
Q. You also sign an oath of resi
dence here?
A No. only one paper, as 1 remem
ber.
y. Well, look at it—it is an oath
of residence and allegiance.
A. They are not supposed to bo
on one copy, you know.
y. One on which you swear your
residence and the other one 1 read
to you?
A. There was only one paper sign
ed at all.
y. Didn't you sign twice?
A. No, sir, I only signed one pa
per. And it was understood to be,
it was an oath of residence, and
then if I ever went through I would
have to take the oath of allegiance
to be a citizen.
Q. 1 read you the oath of alle
giance; you deny making that or
,-igning it?
A. If that is a copy of the original ;
1 don't deny it.
Q. You have never taken out your
citizenship papers since you came
down to Alaska?
A No, sir, 1 haven't, because they j
claim there the papers were never
consummated; in fact, I looked up
the records in Dawson and 1 was
notified it wasn't necessary, 1 had
lost no residence here.
Q. Did you at that time look up
the oath of allegiance where you
swore to support King Edward VII?
A. No, sir, I only saw John Black
about it, and when the oath of al
legiance would be administered would
be final papers, which was never ex
ecuted.
Q. In other words, you had for
gotten about swearing allegiance?
A. 1 had forgotten if it was al
legiance—1 didn't so understand.
Q. You swear you never signed
it?
A. 1 don't think yet it was an
oath of allegiance, until you get your
final papers.
Q. You heard the way 1 read, didn’t
you?
A. Yes.
Q. (Heading affidavit). Signed by
you and sworn by you?
A. Yes, 1 signed a paper something
on that order—1 don’t know whether
that’s the same thing—during the
campuign up there, and it never
came to culmination.
Q. The same—that s the same cam-I
paign where Mr. Thompson took the
oath?
A. I always understood Mr. Thomp
son became a naturalized citizen in
Nelson years before that.
Q. Now, Mr. Caskey, as a matter
of fact, you have knocked nearly
all the government enterprises,
haven’t you?
A. I have never knocked any sin
gle government enterprise.
Q. Haven’t you published an arti
cle here charging Mr. Means, one of
the three commissioners of the En
gineering commission, stating that in
the distribution of money he was dis
criminating against this division and
he thought more of his salary than
he did of his honor—did you make
those statements about Mr. Mears?
A. No, sir, I don’t think 1 ever did.
If I did it was in telegraph, not in
editorial communication. 1 believe
there was something came by tele
graph, and I don’t think that would
be the wording of it anyhow.
Q. Now when you were knocking
the armory, didn’t you say there was
no need of an armory?
A. I did, and I am still of the
opinion.
Q And, of course, as matter of
I fact your knocking the trail is what
started the last little controversy
with Mr Thompson, wasn't it?
A 1 gave a true report of the con
ditions of the trail; 1 don', consider
that 1 knocked it—with the amount
of money spent on the trail 1 con
sidered they had a poor traii.
y. And you went Quite into de
tails in other mutters?
A. Yes, sir.
y As a matter of fact, you have
pliued yourself of leading criticism
on almost everything around the
town?
A. If it is something of a jus; na
ture I certaiuly pride myself on it;
I don't attempt to take up anything
else except on those lines,
y. Uh, no—
A. (continuing)—and in this case—
y. (Interrupting) And In this par
ticular case you heard some rumors
that the armory had been offered
for a lower price?
A. No, I can't say in that way - -
the way it came to me it was an ab
solute fact coming from her bus
band who surely must know.
Q. Alt hearsay, all around.’
A. No, sir, the two witnesses who
will be on the stand will state that
it came lrom headquarters.
Q. You're telling what somebody
told you?
A I can't believe that everything
that is said is a lie.
Q Except the man you're publish
ing something about?
A. Well, I don't say he L u liar, I
simply asked a question. The dis
crepancy seemed pretty great to me
between two thousand dollars and
live thousand dollars deals- -aside
from that 1 heard the thing all
around the town.
Q You heard Mr. Gordon testify
yesterday that he never made an
offer of less then five thousand
dollars?
A. i heard that, yes, sir.
Q. And you heard the president
of the Loyal League, Mr. Clegg and
Mr, Wood and Mr. Clark all testify
Yhompeon hadn't, gotten a cent'.'
A. 1 heard it, yes, sir.
C> And you Gordon testify
!k i.ol not?
A I did.
(; ' our paper i. t morning didn't
give any of the government testi
tueiiy this moraln,', ltd you.’
A. I intended to publish the whole
thing—if it was my own case 1
would—my counsel advised me it
wouldn't he proper.
Q. The public were merely told
about your being on the stand and
your testimony?
A. I don't know really; I haven't
read the story this morning.
Q. That's all.
Re-Direct Examination (By Mr. Mar
quam)
Q. Now with regard to this paper
Mr. Pratt showed you. You testi
fied that you signed, according to
vour remembrance, an oath of resi
dence.
A. An oath of residence as I un
derstood it. I didn't understand the
oath of allegiance was given to any
of us.
Q. And the paper shown you pur
ports to be an oath of residence and
allegiance, typewritten or printed to
gether?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Who did you go to or what
olticial did you consult or consulted
you upon this matter, and who ad
vised with you upon this question of
what you were doing and what you
had to do to become a citizen and
as to what the course of procedure
were?
A. Well, there was no official at
all. In the height of the campaign
it was the Joe Clark element up
there against the Condon element,
we had a pretty bad bunch to deal
with and of course about sixty per
cent of the people were Americans
and they were trying to throw down
the government gang by beating
them at the election. At that time
we were ntnning the Idle Hour club
a good many of us for home com
forts and home cooking, twenty-five
or thirty of us there—
Q. (Interrupting) I’m not talking
about that—you needn’t go into de
tails. After your friends and you
decided you were going to become
residents or whatever it was, what
did you do in the proceedings to that
end?
A. All of us signed up there in
ardor to help with that election; we
all helped with the fight.
Q. From the result of that action
you took up there did you receive
any papers?
A. Never did.
Q. Is that the custom, when a per
son becomes a naturalized citizen
they receive some paper from the
government?
A. I don’t know. It takes an ac
tion of the court 1 know to grunt
papers—that is, that’s what they tell
me up there.
Q Was anything of that kind ever
lone?
A. Never was—the records show
t was not.
y And the only thing ever done
by you was to sign Ibis paper that
you took to be an oath of residence
or declaration amounting to a dec
laration of intention
A Amounting to a declaration, yes
sir.
y Amounting to what we know as
our first papers?
A. Yes, sir.
y And that's as far as you ever
went?
A. Yes, sir.
y. If, as a matter of fact, you
ever signed an oatb that migtu be
termed an oatb of allegiance, would
it be similar to your preliminary
statement of residence?
A. 1 don't know, I took it to be
that. At tbe time we signed this
it was with tbe understanding no
body was bound by it
Q. As far as being .1 Canadian
citizen?
A. As tar as being a Canadian
citizen, because there was some law
in regard to tbe posting of it, 111
which there wasn't time to perfect
cilizenahip.
Q. Before you became a full citi
zen that tiad to be done?
A. Yes, sir.
(j. And there was nothing done
by you further after that time that
! you signed this oath or statement
at the time?
A Never was.
Q. And those being the circum
stances, that's lbs’ reason you an
swered as you did that you never
signed the oath of allegiance, believ
ing that came as a final climax
upon your acceptance as a citizen0
A Yes, sir, that's the idea 1 an
swered on,
Q. Now it seems Mr. Pratt has
opened up the question about your
editorial policy of knocking— I’ll ask
you a few questions upon that which
I attempted before but they were ex
cluded. State what the facts were
about your ever having knocked the
railroad building, or knocking Mears
on the Engineering commission !
don't know what Mr. Pratt is talk
ing about, maybe you do?
A. I don't remember, blit there was
a telegram came to the paper some- j
thing about Mr. Mears’ operations
up in the other divisions, I don’t re
member what it was. I can look up
the files to see what it was; it was
not our knocking. I have had talks
with Mr. Riggs and I assured him
at all times I was always with the
railroad commission in connection
with the furtherance of their work.
Just before I went Outside I had
an hour and a Imlf's conversation
and gave him the assurances at the
time.
Q. Now the n«-xt proposition, on
the armory proposition what posi
tion did you take on that?
A. i took the attitude it was not
necessary for the purchase of an
armory building at any great price
for the drilling of troops that we
would have in this country. Our
pro rata of enlistments in here was
so small, that at any time they did
get them nicely trained they couldn’t
get officers in here to drill them
for service and they would take
them Outside for that purpose to
some cantonment station.
Q. In regard to the financial end
of it, what was the cause of your
opposition? (Objection, etc).
A. Well, it was too much money
to spend in the first place, and then
the method which they were adopt
ing at that time to pull off the deal
didn’t suit me for the simple reason
it looked like a forced policy. It
was my impression they Intended to
go to the people and insist that
they put down certain amounts. Lots
of people couldn't afford to take it,
and by not taking that amount it
might be considered disloyalty, and
1 didn’t think it was putting it in
the proper light. Lots of people
spoke to me about It, and I took
the position or action I did after
talking it over and their views of
it.
Q. What about this five-dollar prop
osition of disposing of tickets, what
was the purpose of opposing that?
(Objection).
A. The same opposition occurred
to that that did to the other; they
intended to sell them, and any per
son that didn’t take a ticket they
would be looked upon as disloyal,
and I thought it opened up too much
ground for talk of disloyalty.
Q. You opposed it on that ground?
A. Yes, sir, and I had a talk with
Mr. Clegg at the time—
Q Did they after that drop and
abandon the idea of going out
amongst the public generally and so
liciting this money from people who
couldn’t afford it, and went to those
who voluntarily gave it—did you
knock that proposition?
A. I did not, 1 endorsed that propo
sition, except that I didn't think it
necessary. But 1 didn't oppose any
individual who wanted to get up
and put their own money in.
Q. Now, Mr. Pratt asked you about
knocking the Road commission. What
have you got to say about that—
iliai is, the Kichardson trail—y<
had just come over that yourself?
A. Yes, sir, 1 came over that m
sell 1 had a big load and made tl
run in a car, saw the exact com
turns as the) were, took an eig
days' run through the mud and mut
and thought i was competent to tt
the exact truth, and 1 think 1 di
1 not only told it iu my own words
1 didn't even dictate that editorii
hut it was done under my control.
y Mr. Kitchen was with the ca
was he?
A. Yes, sir, indeed he was, m
good many ways.
Mrs. J 11. Caskey, witness for th
defense, being til at duly sworn, te<
titled on
Direct Examination (By Mr. Mai
(juaiu)
y. Mrs. Caskey, you're the wile o
the defendant in this case?
A 1 am.
y 1 want to ask you about an u
cideut that occurred, as 1 undei
stand it, at lie- meeting ol Ihe La
dies' ol the Loyal League—is thu
the correct designation ol the meet
ing?
A Woman's IxjyaJ League ol tin
Tanana Valley.
U That was a branch or auxiliary
uf tin- men's I.oyul League.’
A li was supposed to be au auxili
ary. yes. sir, we organized to hell
them all we could.
IT I'll ask you it at any meeting
ot that league, or tit the time, betorc
or after the meeting was held in the
ball t! at the time there was any1
statement made to you by anyone
with reference to the fact '.hat the
Gordon liink had been offered to any
individual for a sum less than two
thousand dollars, and it that incident
that 1 call to your mind did occur,
just state w ho made the statement
and under what circumstances and
what the statement consisted off
(Objection and argument). Just go
ahead and state what occurred at
the time?
A It was at the meeting of the
Woman's Loyal League of which 1
was an executive. 1 got there at the
close of tlie meeting, and at that
tine they wet" discussing the selling
ot tickets
Cj What tickets?
A Well, they wel'e going to give
a ball and charge live dollars -
<T Men and women alike?
A Yes, sir. And when 1 got in
there they were discussing the fact
that they thought it was tuo much,
and a number of the ladies were in
dignant to think they were going to
charge that much because so many
couldn't afford it, and a number of
Indies expressed themselves as say
ing they wouldn’t sell tickets at all
at that price. And 1 got up 1 remem
ber and hated that 1 -(Objection).
y. Just the facts, uot what you
said?
A. The meeting closed soon after
that, and Mrs. Clegg came to me
y. What Mrs. Clegg.’
A. Mrs. Cecil Clegg, wile of Mr.
Clegg, president ot the league, and
also Mrs. Lewis came to me and
said: "The idea of them wanting to
sell the rink tor live thuusand dol
lars and Mrs. Clegg told me only
last year they wanted to sell it
for" 1 think it was twelve hundred
dollars, and she said "The idea of
making capital out of patriotism,” and
she was very indignant.
y. You say you're not sure it was
twelve hundred dollars?
A. I'm absolutely sure it was un
der two thousand dollars; ot course
one lady said it had been offered
lor fifteen hundred and another one
nineteen hundred and so forth, but
Mrs. Clegg said 1 don't remember
exactly, 1 wouldn’t want to take oath,
but it was less than $2,000.
Q. Did she say Mr. Clegg was one
of the trustees of tile Tloneers?
A. Yes, sir, she said he was one
of the trustees it was made to.
Q. You relied on the information?
A. Yes, sir.
y. And after that- what did you do
after that with reference to inform
ing Mr. Caskey?
A 1 came and told him about the
meeting, as i always did for the use
of the paper, but I’m not sure it was
stated so it went on the minutes.
Q. Y'ou told Mr. Caskey of these
facts?
A I gave him an account for the
paper of the meeting.
Q. Y'ou told Mr. Caskey about what
Mrs. Clegg reported from her hus
band?
A. 1 told Mr. Caskey it was under
two thousand dollars, and the state
ment Mrs. Clegg made was "The idea
of making capital out of patriotism?"
Q. Was there any other person
present who heard the statement at
the time?
A. Mrs. Fred Lewis was right there
at the time.
Cross Examination (By Mr. Pratt)
Q. You said you told Mr. Caskey
an offer had been made for some
thing under two thousand dollars?
A. Yes, sir.
(Concluded on Last Page)

xml | txt