|
Hamraersla then and there knowing that the said V/ein had secured evidence of violations of the liquor law of Baltimore City, and that the said V,rein was a necessary witness for the state in such cases, and with the intent to discredit the testimony of the said Vein, did undertake to find if possible something detrimental to the character and reputation of the said Wein; and that the said Pumphrey with the said end in view did secure from George F.Titus, Captain of the Detective Force of Mew York City, a certain letter of the date of June 18th, which contained certain false statements injuriously reflecting upon the character of the said Vein, and your informant, the Maryland Anti-Saloon League, alleges and believes that the said Pumphrey could readily have discovered the falsity of the statements set out in the said letter had he desired so to do.
IV.
That one of said cases in Harford County, viz, State vs. Fisher, was tried in the Circuit Court of Harford County and Bel Air on September 20,1902, and that said Pumphrey and Kammersla were witnesses for the defense therein and freely gave their assistance to said Fisher and aided him in the presentation of his case, so that through their efforts and by their testimony the said Fisher secured his acquittal.
V.
That said Pumphrey testified under oath in Bel Air in the Guy case, which was tried on October 6th and 7th, 1902, and has further stated in writing to this Board that he had no communication with the defense at Bel Air before the trial of the Fisher case, and that when he received his summons in said case he did not know what or about whom he was expected to testify, whereas in truth and in fact he had had such communication and did know what and about whom he was expected to testify when he received such summons and before he went to Bel Air.
VI.
That said Pumphrey and Hammersla testified under oath at Bel Air in the case of State vs. Fisher and again
|
