The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, August 11, 1919, Page 4

'$500,000 and a Lie on the Witness Stand Nicholas Played Game of Anti-Farmer Organization When He Violated " Oath and Misstated Fact in Jackson T'rial HIS is the story of $500,000 and a lie under oath. It is part of a bigger story of politics, of plotting and trickery. It is a story of a violated oath by a public official and a slush fund to fight democracy. The story of the $500,000 is a story of lies, of misrepresen- tations, of political trickery and rotten campaign- ing. The lie of this story is not the biggest lie, but it is one of the most significant that appears in the story of the $500,000. In Minnesota, county attorneys, upon taking of- fice, are required to pledge themselves, under an oath, to perform the duties of their offices “impar- tially * * * and without fraud, deceit or op- pression.” The duties of county attorneys are to enforce the laws—to protect the innocent as well as to punish the guilty. In the law there is no presumption that difference in political opinion is a violation of the law. An oath of this kind was taken by E. H. Nicholas, Jackson county attorney. He had taken it before, and he took it for the last time in January of this .year. He knew what the oath signified. He was presumed to know the duties of his office. Yet Mr. Nicholas lied on the witness stand—and added an- other falsehood to the $500,000 list. Mr. Nicholas, called as a wit- ness for the defense, was asked whether he had had any corre- spondence with Teigen, chief witness for the state, indicted disloyalist and more recently accused of fraud and held in a Wisconsin jail, or whether he had aided Teigen in disposing of his book “exposing” the Non- partisan league. Mr. Nicholas was saved from the necessity of having to answer the first ques- tion when the court sustained an objection by his associate coun- sel, but he swore, in answer to the second, that he had not as- sisted Teigen in disposing of the book. p Why did Nicholas lie? Was he ashamed of having associa- tions with Teigen, the discred- ited? If so, it was entirely nat- ural. 'Nicholas had been active during the war in “loyalty” stunts. Mr. Nicholas played to the galleries throughout the war, vaunting his “patriotism” and strutting with the flag. It would have been hard for Nich- olas to confess in court that he had helped Teigen to dispose of his books, or had any sort of communication with Teigen, who was then under federal indict- ment for alleged violation of the espionage act. TRUTH WOULD HAVE HURT PROSECUTION Or .did Nicholas lie on the witness stand to protect the tes- timony of his star witness? Teigen previously had asserted that there had been no corre- spondence between himself and Nicholas. For Nicholas to have contradicted his own chief wit- ness would have harmed ma- terially the carefully constructed frameup against the head of the Nonpartisan league. He would have impeached the veracity of the man upon whose testimony, above that of everybody else, he was depending upon for con- viction. And Nicholas wanted that conviction. - Conviction, Nicholas believed, meant much to his own political life. He saw rewards . for himself, much mnotice in { the papers, nmot a little fame In his testimony, Mr. Nicholas swore that he h Yet here is his letter to Teigen, throughout the state that would lift him above the obscurity of the office of county attorney at Jackson. Nicholas played the game of politics and lied. He upheld and swore to the lie that Teigen, in- dicted for disloyalty by a grand jury in a United States.court, had told on the stand. He told the lie that interests in St. Paul and Minneapolis, who had used Teigen as a tool, wanted told. He told the lie that the holders of the $500,000 slush fund wanted told. = The entire prosecution of Mr. Townley and Mr. Gilbert was the work of the holders of the $500,000. It was they> who began the “loy- alty” propaganda against the League and made the accusations against its leaders. It was their game that Nicholas was playing when he started the prosecutions. It was their game he was playing when he told the lie on the witness stand. Let us recast the scene in the court at Jackson. Judge E. C. Dean is on the bench. Mr. Nicholas is on the stand, under examination by George Hoke, attorney for the defense. The state is represented by J. E. Markham, assistant attorney general, ap- pointed by the Burnquist gang to assist in the case. NICHOLAS PEDDLES TEIGEN’S BOOKS Whan, TInitinge, AQromtionss., .o wom e o e o e : B s v ad nothing to do with Teigen’s book. in which he says it is his “under- standipg” ‘that he could sell them for 25 cents a copy! N Mr. Hoke is asking Mr. Nicholas whether there had been any correspondence between himself and Mr. Teigen. A series of objections and court opin- ions relieve Mr. Nicholas of the necessity of answering. Hoke: “I don’t suppose you have any objection saying to what extent, if any, you were active with Teigen—" : Nicholas: “I never was active with Teigen or anybedy in circulating the book or having any- thing to do with that book.” ' i Hoke: “Did you have any correspondence with Teigen?” (Objections here, sustained by the court, again save Nicholas.) Hoke: “I believe you stated you were not active in assisting Teigen to sell those books or in the circulation of them?” ‘Nicholas: “No, I have nothing to do with as- sisting Teigen; I had nothing to do with help- ing him—” : : Hoke: “You mean you did not help him to solicit any subscriptions?” X Nicholas: “No.” There is the record. Letters which passed be- tween Mr. Nicholas and Mr. Teigen appear on these - pages. Glance at those written by Nicholas. Do they not con- vict him of the lie? These letters prove not only that Nicholas lied on the stand, but that he was active with Teigen shortly after the latter had been indicted for disloyalty and had been discharged from the employ of the Nonpartisan league, and while Teigen was -working for Charles Patterson and his clique, who were then engaged in spending their $500,- 000 slush fund to defeat the farmers’ organization. PLEDGED TO PERFORM DUTIES WITHOUT DECEIT In the light of the testimony just offered by Mr. Nicholas, let us also reread his oath of office, which he took last January. He pledged himself to perform the duties of his office “impartially * % * and without fraud, de- ceit or oppression.” Has Mr. Nicholas done that? Has he not violated the word he gave, under oath, when he as- sumed the duties of prosecuting attorney of Jackson county? Mr. Nicholas wanted the con- viction of Mr. Townley for his own political aggrandizement. Mr. Patterson, representing cer- tain interests, wanted the con- viction of Mr. Townley. They wanted it badly enough to spend $500,000 for the defeat of the League. They would gladly have spent another $500,000 for the conviction of Mr. Townley, if it had been necessary. They would have been willing to part with some of it for the cor- roboration of Mr. Teigen’s tes- timony by the county attorney. The correspondence was not entirely one-sided, it would be well to be assured. Here are copies of letters which Teigen sent to Nicholas: “April 23rd, 1918. “Mr. E. H. Nicholas, 5 “Jackson, Minn. “My Dear Mr. Nicholas: Yours of March 27th and April 18th, respectively, at hand, for. which please accept my hearty thanks. " In reply, I beg to advise: “Pursuant to the outline I made to you in St. Paul, I have established an office and am now actively preparing the book that I mentioned to you. Tt will be perhaps 10 days or two week