Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "160919118",
    "label": "1930 Scrapbook",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/160919118"
}

{
    "id": "160919118",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/160919118",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "1930 Scrapbook",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/160919118",
    "collections": [
        "George E. Q. Johnson Papers",
        "Scrapbooks"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/chicago/johnsoneq/160919113/160919113_160919118/160919113_160919118_001.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/chicago/johnsoneq/160919113/160919113_160919118/160919113_160919118_001.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/chicago/johnsoneq/160919113/160919113_160919118/160919113_160919118_001.jpg",
    "imageCount": 106,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/160919118",
    "naId": 160919118,
    "coverageEndDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1930-12-31",
        "year": 1930
    },
    "coverageStartDate": {
        "logicalDate": "1930-01-01",
        "year": 1930
    },
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 39,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/chicago/johnsoneq/160919113/160919113_160919118/160919113_160919118_039.jpg",
    "mediaId": "542fa3c9ff8b974e",
    "ocrText": "Trilrme left\nBAR NAMES 56\nATTORNEYS IN\n1930\nCHICAGO\nCANAL SCANDAL\nTUESDAY,\nFiles Its Charges with\nU. S. TO ACCUSE\n1930 24\nSuprame Court.\nCHICAGO ILL TRIBUNE\nFRIDAY, MAY 23, 1930.\nOLIVER OF TAX\n(Pietures on back page.)\nThe Chicago Bar association startled\nChicago legal circles yesterday with a\npetition, filed before the state Supreme\nFIXING INCOME\nU. S. GRAND JURY\ncourt at Springfield, cha rging 56 at-\ntorneys with \" unprofessional and dis-\nhonorable \" conduct in conhection with\nI\nINDICTS NICHOLS\nthe sanitary district pay roll scandal.\nThe association asked permission to\n1\nfile information against the lawyers.\nDefendant Asks Judge to\nDisbarment was not asked specifically,\nAS TAX EVADER\nbut the high court was requested to\ndeal out such punishment as it should\nTry Case Without Jury.\ndeem fit to uphold the standards of\nthe legal profession and maintain its\n0\nhonor and dignity.'\nCounsel for Gene G. Oliver, mem\nLawyers Attack Petition.\nber of the board of assessors, under\nIncome of $94,000 Over\nThe attorneys named will fight the\nindictment for evasion of income\npetition, it was predicted. Maclay\ntaxes, requested Federal Judge Wood\nHoyne, former state's attorney and\nward yesterday to try the case with\nSalary Charged.\naead of the sanitary district in 1927\nout a jury. During the hearing on\nand 1928, whose name headed the list,\nthe motion, it was brought out that\nissued a statement in which he ac-\nthe government would introduce evi-\ncused the association of seeking to\nWilliam E. Nichols, alleged tax\ndence that tax fixing was a source\nplace itself above the law. Other at-\nfixer, was indicted by the federal\nof Oliver's income.\ntorneys in the list, which included\nAlthough there were intimations\ngrand jury yesterday on charges of\nthe names of some of the most promi-\nat the time of the indictment of Wil-\nevading $4,938.39 in income taxes for\nnent lawyers in the city, attacked\nliam E. Nichols, alleged tax fixer, said\nvhat they termed the tyrannical\n1927 and 1928. Nichols'. name has\nto have been associated with Oliver,\nction of the association.\nfigured in the state's attorney's in-\nthat the government would seek to\nHoyne and Hector Brouillet, head\nprove tax manipulations on Oliver's\nvestigation into charges of bribery in\nthe district law department in 1925\npart, yesterday's disclosures were the\nBuilding Commissioner Christian P.\nid 1926, were accused of acquiescing\nfirst of a definite nature.\nand he has been a\nthe placing of an excessive number\nfrequenter of the office of Gene G\nthe lawyers on the district pay roll\nSees \" Prejudicial \" Defense.\nOliver, a member of the board of as-\nd in paying them salaries in excess\nState Senator James J. Barbour,\nsessors, according to federal inyesti\ntheir services to the sanitary dis-\nOliver's attorney, informed the court\ngators.\nct. Other lawyers were charged\nthat a trial without a jury was desired\nNichols, who is a salesman for the\nh being on the pay roll without giv-\nbecause of the prejudicial nature of\nWisconsin Lime and Cement company,\nadequate legal services for their\nthe proposed defense, The request was\nwas indicted on two counts, the first\napensation.\nmade on the basis of a recent decision\ncharging that he had a total income\nNamed in Bar List.\nof the United States Supreme court\nof $50,624.29 in 1927 and the second\nmong the better known lawyers\nthat a jury may be waived by a de-\nthat he received $55,962.28 in 1928. He\nned in the list were James C.\nfendant in a felony case \"within the\nis alleged to have received $44,728 in\nrien, known widely as Ropes\ndiscretion of the court.' Judge Wood-\n1927 above his salary and $49,459,28 in\nrien for his success in winning\nward promised a ruling this morning.\nother income during 1928. The true\naging verdicts in murder cases\n'Your honor,\" said Mr. Barbour,\nbill sets forth that he filed returns\n(\nile he was an assistant state's at-\n\"this defendant is a member of the\nand paid taxes only on his salary and\nmey; William Scott Stewart, also a\nboard of assessors, and receives a sal-\ninterest from bank deposits, less the\nmer assistant state's attorney and\nary of $9,000 a year. As committee\nregular deductions.\nell known criminal lawyer; Stephen\nman from his township, he handled\nMalato, John F. Higgins, Sidney\nconsiderable sums contributed for cam-\nIncome Believed Higher.\"\npaign expenses. In addition to these\nNichols' income for the two years\nyon, A1 F. Gorman, John R. McCabe\nnd Eugene L. McGarry.\nsources, he was given to gambling\nmentioned in the indictment is believed\non the races.\nto have been much more than that\nJohn C. Garriott Jr is charged with\ngetting his brother-in-law, Hugh Miller,\nFears Race Bet Prejudice.\nspecified, according to Assistant United\nStates Attorney Dwight H. Green, but\no\na place on the law department pay\n\"The fact that a public official\nhe said amount could\nto\nroll and with receiving $150 without\nplayed the races is likely to preju-\nbe shown to be income.\ngiving any services.\nn\ndice the minds of the jurors, par-\nOne of the witnesses before the\nPay Roll Charges Againt 53\nticularly at this time, when the mat-\ngrand jury in the Nichols investiga-\nIn addition to Hoyne, Brouillet, and\nter of assessing property is of such\ntion was Attorney Morris Weinberg,\nci\nGarriott, accused of acquiescing in the\npublic concern. We feel that this case\nand he is alleged to have served a\nm\npayments, 53 other lawyers are alleged\nshould be tried by one person, one\nnumber of clients whose sole demand\nm\nto have been on the pay roll without\nwho is learned in the law and who\nwas for a reduction in their taxes.\nfa\nreturning adequate services. These 53\nwill not be prejudiced.'\nJudge Woodward asked whether the\nWeinberg, according to the internal\nand the amounts they are alleged to\nrevenue investigators, dealt with Nich-\nhave received follow:\nquestion of knowledge and intent\nols, who in turn is alleged to have\nst\nwould arise, and whether there would\nBarry J. Berman\n$ 6,666.56\ncommunicated with the proper officials\nJohn M. Beverly\nbe conflicting testimony He was in-\n4,400.00\nformed by counsel for both sides that\nrelative to having assessments low-\nFrank J. Brewbaker\n4,200.00\nered.\nDavis 8. c. Esrow\n5,500.00\nthis would be a major question.\nAssessor Oliver is under indictment\nJhha J. Dillon\n5,799.62\nam reluctant to assume the re-\nfor evasion of income taxes and his\nArthur Donoghue\n3,124.95\nsponsibility of a jury,\" said the court.\nRoy Egan\n3,600.00\n\" When the evidence is of a conflict-\ncase is set for trial on June 18.\nDenjel V. Gallery\n3,541,00\nSamuel J. Graff\ning nature and the question of knowl-\nBribe Charges Made.\n1,250.04\nJohn S. Hall\n2.700,00\nedge and intent must be decided upon,\nAlthough Nichols has figured in the\nJelun F. Higgins\n23,499.86\nit is proper for a jury to try the\nstate's attorney's investigation into\nEugene M. Hines\n8,958.18\ncase.\"\nthe affairs of Commissioner Paschen's\nA. Paul Holleb\n7,933,07\nWe are not asking leniency, your\noffice, the federal authorities did not\nJohn R. Horan\n2,788,78\nhonor, said Senator Barbour.\nconcern themselves with this phase.\nof\nMeyer D. Kauffman\n8,729.7\nCharges that bribes were solicited and\nre\nAssistant United States Attorney\nJohn B. King\n11,000,00\nCassius Poust then stated that the\npaid in Paschen's office were made\nin\nPhilip A. Lozowick\n8,333,2\nby Jules K. Masse, a draftsman, in\nda\nEdward Phillip Luczak\n2,003.43\ngovernment would show evidence of\nCarl H. Lindqnist\n5,724,91\na civil suit, and a grand jury investiga\n10\nincome other than that announced\nStephen A. Malato\n6,875.00\nby the defense.\ntion foliowed\nve\nG. Edwin Mitchell\n17,916.66\nTax Fixing Evidence.\nThe federal investigators expressed\nSt\nWilliam 8. Newburger\n4,500.00\nthe opinion that virtually all of the\nva\nJames C. O'Brien\n3,500.00\nThere will be evidence of income\nincome Nichols is alleged to have made\nAdam E. Patterson\n3,600.00\nfrom tax fixing,\" he said. This was\nabove his salary was as payment in\nJoseph Paufissen\n4,650.00\nbrought out, Mr. Poust explained, in\nLea v. Boeder\nconnection with tax fixing.\n4,250.00\norder that the court might understand\nIvor L. Smith\n5.800,00\nNichols was a candidate for state\nsch\nPhilip Sonnenshein\nthe expected conflicting testimony.\n4,610.80\nsenator in 1922.\nmo\nAugustus L. William\n3,666.63\nThe question of tax fixing will\nCharles F. Brown\n7,708.49\nnot be an issue. The only thing to\nJacob M. Laventhal\n2,874.93\nconsider is income,' said Senator\nNathan A. Lawrence\n8,415,52\nBarbour. He then stated that Oliver's\nEdward H. Lucbeck\n10.064,52\nSidney Lyon\nalleged income on which taxes were\n9,767.76\nArthur F. Manning\n6,240.00\nnot paid was simply a matter of\nHarry Mantell\n5,908.46\ncomputation,' and that Oliver lost as\nJames J. McDermott\n6,537.65\nmuch as he won on the races.\nBobert H. Eberle\n2,083.30\nOliver's trial is set for Thursday\nAI F. Gorman\n8,330.60\nFour indictments charge evasion of\nThomas P. Grant\n4,583.26\nHenry K. Jacobs\nsome $70,000 in taxes, interest, and\n3,166.55\nKleofas S. Jurgelonis\npenalties on income estimated at\n3,435.38\nJoweph A. Kolb\n2,000.00\n$272,000 for 1926, 1927, and 1928.\nMedard A. Kunz\n8,000.00\nJohe M. Lowery\n4,500.00\nBenard J. Mahonoy\n10,253.43\nGeorge II. Masom\n9,687.50\nJohn B. McCabe\n7,500.00\nFrogene L. McGary\n3,800.00\nMark J. MeNamara\n5,208.25\nAbraham L Misener\n2,083.30\nVietor Ohrenstein\n2,889.24\nWilliam Scott\nStewart\n3,750.00\nFormal Charge of Bar.\nThe formal charge against the law-\nyers states that they are guilty of\nunprofessional and dishonorable"
}