bad as Brennan or Smith, did you have an idea that there was something bad about the expenditure of large sums of money? Mr. SAFFORD. I think that is an evil that must be handled and will have to be corrected. The CHAIRMAN. You regard it as morally wrong? Mr. SAFFORD. Well The CHAIRMAN. So you said to this man, " You are as bad as these other rascals," in substance and effect? Mr SAFFORD. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. If it is morally wrong, why are you supporting the man who expended this very large sum of money, to wit, Mr. Smith? Mr. SAFFORD. Because, Senator, the Anti-Saloon League believes that with the powerful political organizations in existence it is idle for us to introduce an independent. We have to choose between the two party candidates. One of them is thoroughly dry, and the other is conspicuously and notoriously wet, making his campaign upon that basis. The CHAIRMAN. And you will swallow the dry even though he has raised a fund of money which is so large that when it is proposed to raise a similar fund, you condemn the man who makes the proposition, and refuse to have anything to do with him, because that is too corrupt for you to touch? Mr. SAFFORD. The situation is this, Senator The CHAIRMAN. That is the fact, is it not? Mr. SAFFORD. We are in a great fight on the wet and dry question. That is the issue here. I have nothing to say in condonement of the campaign funds or where they came from, but the point we make, and I think it is absolutely correct and right, is that when we have one great big fight on our hands, it is idle to turn and try to solve another problem and fight another battle. Our position is that we are going to fight this one through. The CHAIRMAN. So that you would support a man who had raised a corruption fund so great as to shock your conscience, provided that man agreed with you on the prohibition question? We did Mr. SAFFORD. No, Senator, that is not a fair statement. not create this situation. The people have created it. We reach into this situation and take the best we can out of it. The CHAIRMAN. What people created it? Mr. SAFFORD. Sir? The CHAIRMAN. You say the people created it. Do you charge the people of Illinois with creating it? Mr. SAFFORD. The people of Illinois elected these two men in the primaries. That is what I mean. The CHAIRMAN. But to come back to my question regarding the people creating it, your philosophy is that if a man is right on the prohibition question and his opponent is wrong on the prohibition question, you will support the man who is right on the prohibition question, even though he is trying to ride into office by the expenditure of a corruption fund. You would add the power and force of your moral institution to the corruption campaign? Is that your position? Mr. SAFFORD. Of course, we do not consider that Brennan has anything on him in the way of corruption. The CHAIRMAN. Oh, well, let us see about that. Mr. SAFFORD. We have no choice. The CHAIRMAN. You have only spoken of $20,000 for Brennan. Mr. SAFFORD. Well, he is The CHAIRMAN. The Smith campaign fund shows some $125,000 received directly from proprietors of public-service institutions, does it not? Mr. SAFFORD. As far as that is concerned, there is this to be said. It is an evil that has existed a good while. It is nothing new. Publicservice corporations and other institutions have been doing that. It is an evil which ought to have been dealt with before. But the greatest corruptionists that this country every knew were the liquor crowd, the crowd that are back of Brennan and putting him forward. The CHAIRMAN. Yes? Mr. SAFFORD. So we see no relief The CHAIRMAN. Do you know of a single corrupt dollar that Mr. Brennan has received, unless it was the $15,000 he got from Insull? Mr. SAFFORD. Well, that is three-fourths of his campaign fund. The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Mr. SAFFORD. But our position is perfectly clear and straightforward on that. The CHAIRMAN. I think so. That is, your position is this, Doctor, and I think we might agree on it, that you do not care what a man is Mr. SAFFORD. No, no. The CHAIRMAN. Or what his morals are Mr. SAFFORD. You could not be more unfair, Senator. The CHAIRMAN. Let me state it, now. Mr. SAFFORD. Well, state it right. The CHAIRMAN. That regardless of a man's morals, regardless of the corrupt influences he has back of him, if he is right on the prohibition question you will support him and aid in the consummation of a corrupt scheme, just if a man is right on the prohibition question; and you will do that against a man who might be right on every other question, but, in your opinion, is wrong on that one? Mr. SAFFORD. No, Senator. You could not state it more unfairly than that. You have stated a general proposition, and we are talking now about one particular instance in which the majority of the things which you have laid down do not apply. The CHAIRMAN. You say that Brennan represents a corrupt crowd. Will you name them? Mr. SAFFORD. No; I can not name them. I do not think it is necessary. The CHAIRMAN. Could you name any of them? Mr. SAFFORD. No. The liquor crowd. The CHAIRMAN. You mean, by that, the man who does not believe in prohibition? Mr. SAFFORD. No. I mean the organized liquor interests that are putting forth Mr. Brennan. The CHAIRMAN. What are the organized liquor interests? I am interested in knowing, because if they are putting forward candidates and raising money, that is just what this committee wants to find out. Mr. SAFFORD. I can not give you the names. The CHAIRMAN. Can you give us any of them? Mr. SAFFORD. I possibly could find them out, but I can not now. The CHAIRMAN. I wish you would. It would accommodate us greatly if you could tell us some liquor interests that are putting up money, because we are looking for just these chaps. We are going to be in session a day or two more, and if you can give us the names of these contributors we would be obliged to you. Mr. SAFFORD. I suppose I could not do that, because we do not have access to things of that sort. The CHAIRMAN. If you can not do it, very well. But we know our enemies, doctor. Mr. SAFFORD. We do not need to argue about that, Senator. The CHAIRMAN.. If you can not do it or can not tell the names of the men or a name of a man, why do you, under oath, make the broad statement that the thing exists? Mr. SAFFORD. Because, Senator, we have been in this fight for 30 years and know this crowd and know what they stand for. The CHAIRMAN. I think it is obvious. Now, Mr. O'Brien came to you. Is he a minister? Mr. SAFFORD. He stated that he was. The CHAIRMAN. Is he pastor of the West Pullman Methodist Episcopal Church? Mr. SAFFORD. He stated that he was. I believe he has been transferred to another church by the last conference. The CHAIRMAN. That is no reflection on the Methodist Church, because they transfer their ministers regularly. Mr. SAFFORD. Oh, no; that has nothing to do with this. The CHAIRMAN. Do you know what church he has been transferred to? Mr. SAFFORD. I think he has been transferred to the Blue Island Methodist Church. The CHAIRMAN. In Chicago? Mr. SAFFORD. Yes; somewhere around. The CHAIRMAN. Then you gave a statement of this interview or these interviews that you had with Mr. O'Brien, the Reverend O'Brien, to the newspapers? Mr. SAFFORD. I went to Mr. Magill with them and had a private conversation, and told him all about it. The CHAIRMAN. What did Mr. Magill say? Mr. SAFFORD. He said he did not want to hear it, and he became very indignant. The CHAIRMAN. Have there been some negotiations between Mr. Magill and the representatives of the Anti-Saloon League with reference to supporting him? Mr. SAFFORD. No, sir-well, yes; of course, that is what Mr. O'Brien came to me for. The CHAIRMAN. No. I mean, aside from Mr. O'Brien. Mr. SAFFORD. No-well, I beg your pardon. Some ministers have been to see us and tried to get us to go into the Magill campaign. The CHAIRMAN. In behalf of Mr. Magill? Mr. SAFFORD. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. But you saw Mr. Magill yourself? The CHAIRMAN. And when you did see Mr. Magill, was there not some talk about his desire to have the Anti-Saloon League support him? Mr. SAFFORD. No. He stated this-well. I don't know as that would be exactly true. I gave him an account of those interviews, and he became very indignant at the Anti-Saloon League. I could not say that he asked for our support; I do not think he did. The CHAIRMAN. Well, what did he become indignant at you for; because you had told him about this? Mr. SAFFORD. Yes, sir. He said it was not true; that there were no such funds: and that Mr. O'Brien was not authorized to speak for him. I said that Mr. O'Brien seemed to be the central figure in the group. Mr. O'Brien, the papers reported, the same day took his petition to Springfield. The CHAIRMAN. Took whose petition? Mr. SAFFORD. Mr. Magill's. The CHAIRMAN. That is, the papers on the same day you had your second interview with Reverend O'Brien Mr. SAFFORD. No; I beg your pardon. The same day I had the interview with Mr. Magill; that is the day that his petition was taken. The CHAIRMAN. And about when was it you had the interview with Mr. Magill; how long after the 25th day of September? Mr. SAFFORD. I can get you those dates exactly. I can give you the exact date, but not from memory. The CHAIRMAN. Was it only a few days? Mr. SAFFORD. Yes: only a couple of days; three or four days afterwards. I think it was one week. I think it was Saturday, the 9th, that I had this interview with Mr. Magill. The CHAIRMAN. If I understand the chronology, about the 25th day of August the Reverend O'Brien had his first interview with you touching this matter that you have just discussed? Mr. SAFFORD. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. And on the 25th day of September he returned and had the long conference with you and Mr. McBride? Mr. SAFFORD. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Which you have just related. Mr. SAFFORD. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. And that about one week after that conversation of the 25th of September, you called on Mr. Magill and related to him in substance the conversation you had had with O'Brien on the 25th day of September? Mr. SAFFORD. I did, sir. The CHAIRMAN. And that within about two days after your interview with Mr. Magill the newspapers announced that the Reverend O'Brien had carried to the secretary of state's office the filing papers of Mr. Magill? Mr. SAFFORD. It was all on the same day, Senator. The day I saw Mr. Magill was the day he arrived here from the East, and it was the same day that the papers reported that his petition was filed. The CHAIRMAN. By the Reverend O'Brien? Mr. SAFFORD. Yes, sir. There is one statement that I recall now that I think is of material significance in this discussion. In the course of his statement, Mr. O'Brien, in this interview of September 25, stated that the group which he represented had had a number of men before them before they decided upon Mr. Magill. The CHAIRMAN. A number of men whom they were considering? Mr. SAFFORD. Yes; a number of men, before they decided upor Mr. Magill. The CHAIRMAN. And did you understand that the men were there in person, or that they were considering their names? Mr. SAFFORD. Well, I recall what he stated; one man-I do not recall his name; he said he was a wet-who came before them, and they considered him, but decided that they did not want him. The CHAIRMAN. Do you remember who this man was? Mr. SAFFORD. I do not. The CHAIRMAN. You do not know who the bad man was! The CHAIRMAN. How much money has the Anti-Saloon League collected since I last examined you? Mr. SAFFORD. I think, Senator, about $20,000. I expected to have all my papers here this morning, but I found they were not quite in shape. I will be glad to give you all the financial information and will try to have it ready for you to-morrow, or at latest by Wednesday everything about it. The CHAIRMAN. What steps have you taken to make your support of Mr. Smith effective? Mr. SAFFORD. We have done very little up to date. The papers have been giving us so much publicity that we have not had to spend any money. They have been telling our story; and that, of course, is the main thing we want to get to the people. We are just now sending out some copies of the Colonel's statement. That is the first direct The CHAIRMAN. Colonel Smith, you mean? Mr. SAFFORD. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. I see. That is where you get this title you have been applying to me. You have had so many interviews with Colonel Smith that Mr. SAFFORD. I have had but one interview with Colonel Smith. The CHAIRMAN. But it was an impressive interview. Would you mind bringing us copies of the circulars you have sent out, and also giving us the names of the printers who printed the circulars? Mr. SAFFORD. I am perfectly willing to. "" I The CHAIRMAN. What have you done in the way of setting, at work the machinery of your organization? By "machinery mean the various community organizations which I suppose you have, through whom you work. Do you have such an organization? Mr. SAFFORD. We have our friends in the counties. The CHAIRMAN. How do you designate the man who is to control a particular county or district? Mr. SAFFORD. We have our county representative. The CHAIRMAN. What do you call him? Is he a captain, or a lieutenant, or "colonel"? You have some designation for him, do you not? Mr. SAFFORD. We generally call him the county chairman. |