Harlow's Weekly (Oklahoma City, Okla.), Vol. 18, No. 9, Ed. 1 Wednesday, March 3, 1920 Page: 4 of 16
This newspaper is part of the collection entitled: Harlow’s Weekly and was provided to The Gateway to Oklahoma History by the Oklahoma Historical Society.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
4
H A R LOW’S WKEKLX
JAMES S MAHON
Hr resides at Miami, and has twice represented Otta
wa county in the house of representatives. At
present he is asking First congressional district re-
publicans to make him their candidate for congress.
teitailied doubt as to whether the application deserved
the sentence he had received and learned that Judge
Cole was very anxious that clemency be granted:
that lie talked with and had conversation with other
parties whom he regarded as entirely reliable and who
recommended to him that lie grant lite clemency prayed
for; that the clemency granted resulted from his
searching inquiry ill an effort to learn t|ie facts in the
eti.se. Lieutenant Governor Trapp further testified
that no undue, improper or far-reaching influence
had Irnen used upon Idin in an effort to obtain clemency
from him in atty case where a hearing wn •> ha I before
him; that he had never acted under or made a. decision
by virtue of any undue influence or by atty reason
reached beyond the propriety in granting clemency
in any case.
Humming up this case, the testimony shows that
Caesar Killer’s sentence to life wtis commuted by
Acting Governor Trapp to fifteen years, which com
mutation would end Killer's confinement in the peni-
tentiary, under the law giving credits to prisoners for
good behavior, altout January 1st. 1920. The testi-
mony tuid the records further show that about Janu-
ary 7th, Acting Governor Trapp issued an expiration
pardon to Caesar Killer. The testimony shows that
the commutation of this sentence was granted when
neither the (Nirdon and parole attorney, nor his ste-
nographer were present to perfect the recon I in the
ea. e. A stenographer in the governor’s office wrote
the commutation and did not file with the secretary
of state a copy of that commutation. The supposition
is. that not being familiar with the matter of keeping
the reco ds. she did not know it was necessary to do
so. Not having lieen in the office when the commu-
tation was Issued, and nothing having been said- to
him about It. the pardon and parole attorney testifies
that lie thd not know that Caesar Killer's sentence
had been commuted, and Governor Robertson testifies
to the same thing. Not until Mr. Russell published a
story to the effect that there was a falsification of the
records, was the matter brought to the minds of the
pardon and parole attorney and the governor. When
they learned that this commutation had been granted.
Mr. Searcy, the pardon attorney, completed the record
In the secretary of state’s office.
There has been no falsification of any records, and
Hie testimony shows that Mr. Russell could have as-
certained this fact had he gone to the office of the
pardon attorney and sought the information where the
records are kept.
The testimony is to the effect that Mr. Russell has
known for sometime tlie true facts in this case, bur
has iiersistently published that the records were falsi-
fied.
The fourtli case mentioned in the above communi-
cation to the legislators is that of the state against
Hickman Willis. In this case Campbell Rusnell testi-
fied that he had not examined the records on file In the
office of the pardon and parole department of the
state: that he did not know who represented the ap-
plicant in the hearing of said application, but that he
did know that Tom Hunter of Hugo filed contracts
with the Indian agency for a fee In the sum of $25,-
000.00. That Willis was called In when the approval
of this contract hail been refused by Gabe E. Parker,
superintendent of Five Clvillzx’d Tribes, and that i«e did
not know, but did assume that the applicant was re-
turned to the penitentiary in order to give Tom Hun-
ter an opiMirtunity to have a contract approved. That
he did not know who recommended the clemency In
this case, and that he did not charge that any of-
ficer or employe of the jiardon and parole depart-
ment received any money or other thing of value In
consideration for the clemency granted.
<». If. Searcy, pardon attorney, testified In this
case that Hickman Willis had been granted a leave
of absence. Upon recommendations of exemplary
record and conduct It was represented that he bad
large interests in the oil field that needed his at-
tention. That while he was away on tins leave of
absence, he married, which was a violation of the
rule, and upon learning of this violation. Governor
Robe Ison revoked the leave and returned him to the
penitentuiry and he Is there now.
Mr. Searcy testified that the revocation of this leave
of ah cnee was due wholly to the violation of its con
ditlons and that neither Mr. Searcy nor Governor
Robertson ha 1 any knowledge whatever of any con-
tracts with attorneys acting in behalf of Hickman
Willis.
Governor Robertson testified that when his at-
tention was called to the fact that Hickman Willis
had violated the te ms of his leave of absence, he did
not know that any attorneys in this state or any other
state had made a contract with Hickman Willis to
represent him before the pardon and parole depart-
ment.
He di 1 testify that Hunter & runningham of Hugo,
had been before him representing Hickman Willis
hut had no means of finding out whether or not they
had any contract with Hickman Willis, and that matter
was never brought to his attention.
He testified further that after Mr. Russell had made
the charge that Hickman Willis was returned to the
penitentiary, probably for the reason that the attor-
ney's contract had not been approved, he began an
investigation and found out that there were several
contracts between Hickman Willis and attorneys wh<>
were to represent him In this pardon case. The gov-
ernor testified that Hickman Willis Is a very wealthy
Indian, and Mr. Searcy testified that Willis had
$3511 000.00 to his credit In the Indla.n agency at Mus
kogec.
Governor Robertson said he learned that Hickman
« Willis had made one contract during Governor Wil-
liams’ administration to pay certain attorneys $100.-
000 00 to get him out of the penitentiary. and the tes-
timony before this commission would Indicate that
Hickman Willis would make a contract for any con-
sideration upon condition that he be gotten out of
the penitentiary.
A letter from Gabe E. Parker, stipe intendent of the
Five Civilized Tribes, which will be found In the
record of the hearing before this committee, states
that no contract was on file In his office for $25.-
000 Oft to secure a pardon or parole for Hickman
Willis. Such a contract was presented between Hick-
man Willis and Warren & Warren, of Hugo, for $25.-
000.00 Mr. Parker does not say that Hunter &
Cunningham had filed a contract for any amount In
his office.
In summing up this case the committee finds from
the inferences of Mr. Russell that large sums of
money were being used In the Hickman Willis case
to Influence the governor, or that the governor had
returned Hickman Willis to the penitentiary because
contracts had not been approved, are false anud without
foundation.
That the governor and pardon attorney both testi-
fied that they had no knowledge that there was
any contract in the Hickman Willis case until Mr
Russell’s publication to that effect.
Hickman Willis is now In the penitentiary and was
returned for the reason that he violated a leave of
absence and the conclusion Is in the minds of this
committee that the governor feels that he cannot
trust him outside the walls of the prison.
The last case mentioned In the above communi-
cation Is that of the state vs. Meekie Ralston.
In this case. Campbell Russell test’fled before your
committee that he had never Investigated the records
in the office of the pardon and parole department
relating to the application filed and the hearing for
clemency: that he did not know who represented the
applicant at said hearing, hut had evidence tending
to show that it waa George R. Rittenhouse, of Okla-
homa City: that he could not state what fees were
paid. If any. to the attorney In this case: that he
had some Information concerning the merits of the
case and concerning the recommendations filed for
clemency, the matters and things under consideration
by the pardon and parole attorney in granting clem-
ency. but that he had not heen fully advised of all the
information the pardon and parole attorney had before
hltn; that he had no information showing that any of-
ficial or employe of the pardon and parole department
received any money or other thing of value, either
S. 1*. FREEZING
Oklahoma attorney general, who led the state rights
antagonists of the federal suffrage amendment,
and who will stage ills candidacy for the United
Slates senate as an advocate of greater authority
to the sovereign states and lessening of central
governmental powers. Mr. Freellng’s ability as
an »ritor and his argumentative talent secure
re? >giiitioii beyon I the state lines.
directly or indirectly, in consideration for the grant-
ing of clemency in this case.
Governor Robertson, in his testimony before your
committee, stated that George B. Rittenhouse repre-
sented the applicant in the hearing of his application
for clemency in this case, but that he was never
ndvlsed and knew nothing about a fee being paid to
sail attorney in said matter; that, in fact, he knew
very little about the case until he received a letter
from a Mr. Cullison, Interceding in hehalf of the
applicant, which letter stated that the applicant wa.s
not of age, but only 17 years of age. had been de-
serted by his family; was refused counsel or aid at
the time of the trial and therefore, induced to plead
guilty and thereafter sentenced to life imprisonment.
The governor further testified that this letter caused
him to become Interested in this application and that
he called up the warden at the reformatory and re-
quested him to send the applicant up to see him.
That Meekie Ralston did not seem too intelligent,
and therefore, after considering all the facts and
circumstances in the case, and after accumulating all
the data obtainable and pursuing every effort to de-
termine whether the application should be granted,
it was decided to grant clemency in this case.
In the testimony of 0. H. Searcy before your com-
mittee in this case, he stated that George B. Ritten-
house of Oklahoma City, represented the applicant a.t
the heating for clemency; that he was never advised
whether Mr Rittenhouse received any fee for such
services or the amount of any fee paid to him; that
as pardon and parole attorney he wag diligent In an
effort to obtain all the facts and all the Information
that could be obtained in an effort to determine
whether clemency should be granted; that as a re-
sult of his efforts he felt that he was justified from
the facts and circumstances In recommending clem-
ency and that he therefore, made such recommenda-
tions to the governor.
It is therefore, the opinion of your committee that
no improper influence was exerted by any attorney
or any other individual In an effort to obtain clemency
in this case, but that the pardon and parole depart-
ment. through Its properly delegated officers was
diligent in an effort to learn the truth about this
case, so that a proper order might be granted upon a
hearing of the application.
After having considered all of the evidence thaj
has l»een submitted to your committee, we unhesi-
tatingly report, that the statements and insinuations
made by Mr. Campbell Russell against the pardon and
parole department of this state and against the gov-
ernor of this state, are unsupported by facts and <Jn
not constitute a charge of any nature.
To the minds of this committee, Mr. Russell has
failed to observe the most common rules in securing
evidence to substantiate his charges. He admits in
his testimony, that he never made any attempt to ex-
amine the records of the pardon and parole depart
inent; that he never talked with Governor Robertson
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
Harlow, Victor E. Harlow's Weekly (Oklahoma City, Okla.), Vol. 18, No. 9, Ed. 1 Wednesday, March 3, 1920, newspaper, March 3, 1920; Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. (https://gateway.okhistory.org/ark:/67531/metadc1600874/m1/4/: accessed April 25, 2024), The Gateway to Oklahoma History, https://gateway.okhistory.org; crediting Oklahoma Historical Society.