Earl H. Fehl, weekly publisher and off-time candidate for mayor of Medford, Saturday filed his candidacy for county judge on the Republican ticket. It was a surprise filing, as Fehl has repeatedly declared he would devote his political efforts to be mayor of this city.
    Fehl gave as his slogan: "Reduce property tax."
    He is the second candidate within the week to file for the county judgeship, A. H. Willett of Talent, retired business man, filing Friday.
    Susanne Homes Carter, county school superintendent, late Saturday filed her intention to seek reelection on the Republican ticket, giving her slogan as "Equal opportunity for all the children, on a basis of economy,"
    C. R. Bowman of Talent, connected with the schools, has also filed for the county school superintendency on the Republican ticket. Bowman gave as his slogan "Efficient, economical and progressive methods."
    County Clerk Delilia Stevens Meyer has not as yet made up her mind about seeking reelection.
    Everett Beeson of Talent, a farmer of that section and a member of a well-known Southern Oregon pioneer family, said Saturday that he would file Monday for sheriff on the Republican ticket, and would make an active campaign for the post. J. B. Hughes, Phil Loud and C. J. Haas have already filed to the place, and two more besides Beeson are about ready to announce themselves.
    Filing to date for county offices, which do not close until a month before the primary, or April 20, are as follows:
    County clerk--George Carter
    Sheriff--Republican, Phil Loud, J. B. Hughes and C. J. Haas, Ralph Jennings and Gordon Schermerhorn, Democrats.
    County Judge--A. H. Willett and Earl H. Fehl, Republican.
     County commissioner--C. E. Velin, Willow Springs, and Ralph Billings, Ashland.
    Justice of the peace, Medford district--Glenn O. Taylor (incumbent), Fred Colvig and Everett Brayton, Republicans. W. H. Canon, Democrat.
    School superintendent--A. J. Hanby, Medford and C. R. Bowman, Talent, Republicans.
    There have been no filings for county assessor or treasurer. It has been generally thought that J. R. Coleman and A. C. Walker, incumbents, will seek reelection on the Republican ticket. Walker is being urged to run for county judge but to date has refused.
    The county judgeship will probably be the principal target, along with the sheriff's office, in the primary. The Democrats are grooming a candidate, which means that at least one other Democrat will make the race. J. F. Wortman of Phoenix and attorney W. E. Phipps of this city are mentioned in the place.   
    E. B. Day of Sams Valley was in Medford yesterday and stated he had decided to be a candidate for renomination on the Republican ticket for representative from this district.
    Mr. Day, one of the leading farmers and stockmen of this county, served in the last legislature and was a member of reapportionment, agricultural, assessment and taxation, fisheries, irrigation and drainage and horticultural committees, being a chairman of reapportionment, a very important committee, particularly to Oregon.
    Victor Bursell, present county commissioner, who has been spoken of as a possible candidate for county judge, said yesterday he has decided not to seek the judgeship, but on the solicitation of friends from different parts of the county, will be a candidate for the Republican nomination for representative to succeed H. S. Deuel, who has decided not to seek renomination.
    Mr. Bursell has been a prominent citizen and farmer of the Central Point district for years.
    So far no other Republicans of the county are seeking the nominations for representatives. This county elects two members of the lower house in November. Senator George Dunn of Ashland is a holdover senator, and there will be no election for this office until 1934.
Medford Mail Tribune, February 7, 1932, page 1


    Trial of the libel suit for $50,000 alleged damages of Roy Parr, game warden, Ashland, against the Pacific Record-Herald, weekly, and its editor, Earl H. Fehl, will probably be called in circuit court tomorrow morning before Judge H. D. Norton.
    Preliminary to the main trial, attorney Allison Moulton for the plaintiff late Monday attempted to secure a deposition from Fehl. Attorney Moulton abandoned the effort when the court ruled that Fehl did not have to answer questions that might reveal his defense.
    Fehl was represented by attorneys F. J. Newman, T. G. Enright and E. C. Kelly. Objections were numerous and at one point all three objected at once, which gave the large audience waiting for the Reed murder verdict a laugh.
    Attorney Moulton informed the court at one point that "defense counsel is trying to heckle me." Later in the course of the spirited arguments, the court admonished the lawyers to go slow, "or we will all become irritated."
Medford Mail Tribune, March 1, 1932, page 1


    Selection of a jury and the opening statements of both sides were completed early this afternoon in the suit for $50,000 damages by Roy Parr against the Pacific Record-Herald. The jury, as accepted, is as follows:
    Lloyd Bearss, farmer, Rogue River; John P. Dougherty, Ashland; Earl F. Moore, storekeeper, Gold Hill; Mrs. Katherine E. Lathrop, housewife, Central Point; Anderson Mee, farmer, Applegate; Mrs. Myrtle GeBauer, housewife, Medford; Mrs. Grace Pankey, housewife, Medford; E. D. Thompson, farmer, Rogue River; B. J. Palmer, retired, Medford; Richard Fredenberg, worker, Medford; R. S. Daniels, electrical engineer, Medford; Joseph Randles, merchant, Ashland.
    Opening statements of the defense were made by attorney E. E. Kelly and for the plaintiff by attorney Arthur Moulton.
    An alleged statement in an article published November 20, 1930, in which reference was made to Parr as a "murderer," was the basis of the action.
    Selection of a jury in the libel suit of Roy Parr, game warden, against the Pacific Record-Herald, a weekly paper, and Earl H. Fehl, its editor, began this morning in circuit court before Judge H. D. Norton. Parr asks $25,000 general damages and $25,000 punitive damages.
    Prospective jurors were asked by the defense if they view the prohibition law as more "sacred" than any other law, if they had prejudices against the enforcement of the game laws, and if they held any prejudice against Fehl or his articles and if they believed officers were entitled to privileges in use of firearms.
    The plaintiff questioned the veniremen upon their views of law enforcement, the "freedom of the press," and if they were readers of the Pacific Record-Herald.
    It will be the contention of the defense that the alleged libelous article, entitled "A Call to Arms," was published as a matter of news and for the public good, following a number of shooting tragedies in Jackson County, and that the article was written without malice to Parr.
    The plaintiff will hold that editor Fehl in publishing the article overstepped the "freedom of the press," wrote the article without obtaining the full and complete facts, and that Game Warden Parr was not at the scene of the shooting at the time of the tragedy.
    The suit grows out of an article published November 20, 1930, a week after the fatal shooting of Everett Dahack, during a raid on a moonshine still on Reese Creek, eight miles northeast of Eagle Point.
    The trial is expected to require all day. Fehl will be the principal witness in his own behalf. The plaintiff will call the four officers on the raid and Coroner Conger and introduce the records and testimony of the coroner's jury which failed to fix the blame for Dahack's death. A regular and special grand jury called by Governor Meier to investigate the shooting failed to return a true bill.
    Fehl is represented by attorney Frank J. Newman, E. E. Kelly and T. J. Enright, and Parr by attorney Allison Moulton of this city and attorney Arthur Moulton of Portland.
    At the opening of the trial the courtroom was only comfortably filled with spectators.
Medford Mail Tribune, March 3, 1932, page 1


    Cross-examination of Earl H. Fehl in the libel suit of Game Warden Roy H. Parr started this afternoon at 2:30 o'clock, and the first question of attorney Arthur Moulton, brought a titter from the large audience and a rebuke to them from counsel.
    Asked what he was doing on November 14, 1930, Fehl replied, "Minding my own business."
    The crowd laughed and attorney Moulton retorted, "that was a bright answer, and seems to have pleased the audience, but you will answer my question."
    In his own behalf, Fehl declared that he did not know Parr at the time the article was published, that he bore him no malice, that he offered to print Parr's side of the question, and that his only object in printing the article was for the public good.
    Fehl said he objected to officers "banding themselves together and swooping down on any citizen."
    Fehl said that he had known Dahack for many years, and that he had attended the preliminary hearing in justice court. He further testified that the "public mind was inflamed" by the shooting.
    Efforts of the defense were directed to show mitigation and justification, and to prove that no malice was borne towards Parr by the editor.
    Earl H. Fehl, editor of the Pacific Record-Herald, today launched his defense in the libel suit for $50,000 general and punitive damages filed against him by Roy Parr, game warden.
    Among the witnesses to be called by the defense will be the widow of Everett Dahack, slain during the raid on the Reese Creek still November 14, 1930, who will testify that the husband had no connection with the still and came upon it accidentally while hunting cows.
    Attorney F. J. Newman, one of the defense counsel, indicated that upon the completion of the evidence he would introduce a motion asking for a directed verdict and asking that the case be taken from the jury on the ground that it had not been shown that Parr had suffered any damages.
    The defense is also expected to attempt to show justification and mitigating circumstances and that Fehl penned the alleged libelous article without malice, but for the public good. Fehl, in the article entitled "A Call to Arms," is averred to have named Parr as "a wanton murderer." Overzealousness on the part of officers in enforcing prohibition laws and being heavily armed for liquor raids will also be interposed as part of the defense.
    The defense will also attempt to show by witnesses that Parr now occupies the same position financially and socially as he did before the publication of the article and that therefore he has suffered no damages.
    Members of the raiding party testified yesterday for the plaintiff. The evidence did not differ in any detail from that already known. Records of the testimony at the coroner's inquest were introduced. There was no evidence that Parr had fired a shot at the raid but was in the vicinity on game warden matters.
    Plaintiff witnesses testified that the raiders went heavily armed to the still because its operators and owners had a reputation for resisting arrest, and gunplay.
Medford Mail Tribune, March 4, 1932, page 1


    Final arguments, instructions of the court and a decision by the court on a defense motion for a directed verdict in the libel suit of Roy Parr against Earl H. Fehl, editor of the Pacific Record-Herald, will be the order of business in the circuit court tomorrow when the session is resumed.
    Final arguments and instructions of the court are expected to take the greater portion of the day, with the case being in the hands of the jury by mid-afternoon at the earliest.
    Defense plea for a directed verdict is based upon the contention that Parr suffered no damage as a result of the publication of the article, November 20, 1930, as he holds the same official position and suffered no loss of social prestige. The defense also holds the article was published without malice and that an offer was made to print any comment Parr might care to make.
    Circuit Judge H. D. Norton excused the jury until Monday morning with the admonition that they refrain from discussing or reading about the case. Judge Norton held it was imperative that he hold the regular Saturday session of court in Grants Pass to clear up routine matters, inasmuch as no session was held there a week ago on account of the Reed murder trial.
    Hearing of testimony in the trial was completed Friday afternoon with defendant Fehl on the stand. After a short cross-examination he was excused.
    Principal evidence in the case concerns what transpired at the Reese Creek still, November 14, 1930, when Everett Dahack was slain. Testimony was introduced to show that all the men at the still, including Raleigh Mathews, William Goetchen, a man by the name of Smith and the slain man had come upon the still accidentally while hunting cattle.
    The plaintiff introduced evidence to show that Parr fired no shot during the raid.
    The defense contends that if the language in the article under fire was strong, it was made necessary by the stress of the conditions.
    Parr is represented by attorney Arthur Moulton of Portland and Allison Moulton of this city. The defense is represented by attorney F. J. Newman, T. J. Enright, E. E. Kelly and E. C. Kelly. The same battery of legal talent defended Fehl in his first libel suit more than a year ago.
Medford Mail Tribune, March 6, 1932, page 1


    The libel suit of Roy Parr, game warden, against the Pacific Record-Herald and its editor Earl H. Fehl will be in the hands of the jury by noon tomorrow from present indications. It is expected that the balance of today will be devoted to legal oratory, and that tomorrow morning will be taken up with the instructions of the court.
    At the opening of this afternoon's session attorney Frank J. Newman began for the defense. Attorney Newman centered his attack on Joe Cave, policeman and member of the raiding party. He charged that Policeman Cave fired the shots that caused the death of Everett Dahack. Attorney Newman based his allegations on testimony of William Smith, arrested as a moonshiner at the time. Attorney Newman declared the court's instructions would show enforcement officers had no right to raid while armed.
    Attorney Newman cited enforcement slaying in this county, in the past, as warranting Fehl's articles, and "that he attacked not the men--but the act."
    Attorney Allison Moulton in his opening address to the jury held that who killed [Dahack] was not an issue in the trial, but was incidental thereto. The real issue, he declared--was Roy Parr libeled.
    The courtroom was only comfortably filled with spectators and included many friends and relatives of Everett Dahack.
    Closing arguments were launched this morning in the libel suit of Roy Parr, game warden, against the Pacific Record-Herald, weekly, and Earl H. Fehl, its editor, following the denial by the court of the defense motion for a directed verdict. Counsel for both sides, and the court, before the jury was placed in the box also agreed on the special instructions to the jury.
    The defense in its plea for a directed verdict sought for "nominal damages"--which means no damages at all, and technical guilt without malice. The court held the question of "the invasion of a man's right to a reputation was a question for the jury to decide," and that guilt and damages, if any, also came under the same head.
   The defense pleads "special privilege," and that the criticisms were for the "public good" and without malice.
    The Washington state libel law, which is strict, and numerous Oregon libel cases were cited by the court ere denial of the directed verdict plea.
    Attorney Allison Moulton opened for the plaintiff. Attorneys Kelly, Enright and Newman will speak for the defense.
    The trial started last Thursday and recessed over Saturday and Sunday. Parr asks $50,000 general punitive damages as a result of an article entitled "A Call to Arms," published after the killing of Everett Dahack, Eagle Point, during a raid November 14, 1930 on a Reese Creek still. The plaintiff contends that the reference to a game warden as a "wanton murderer" constitutes libel and cause for legal action.
Medford Mail Tribune, March 7, 1932, page 1


    Further legal action by counsel for the Pacific Record-Herald, weekly, and its editor, Earl H. Fehl, against whom a circuit court jury yesterday afternoon returned a verdict awarding Roy Parr, game warden, $5000 general damages and $10,000 punitive damages for alleged libel, has not been definitely decided upon, T. J. Enright of defense counsel said today. An appeal, however, to the state supreme court is likely, attorney Enright said. With the return of the verdict the court granted the usual 10 days for further legal steps.
    The jury took "six or eight" ballots, the first ballot, jurors said, being unanimous that there was no "justification or mitigation" for publication of the article upon which the libel suit was predicated. The other ballots were taken to decide the amount of the punitive and general damages. Fifteen thousand dollars punitive damages was considered once but voted as "excessive."
    Members of the jury said the fact that no retraction had been printed by the Pacific Record-Herald, or Fehl as its editor, was taken into consideration in their deliberations. Serious allegations against Joe Cave, Medford policeman, were not weighed in the final award.
    The findings in favor of Parr were generally expected by followers of the case, but the size of the damage award was higher than predicted. R. S. Daniels of Medford was foreman of the jury, composed of three women and nine men.
    After the reading of the verdict, Fehl and Parr met and shook hands. Fehl said:
    "Well, Parr, you've broke me."
    "No, I didn't. You broke yourself," was Parr's rejoinder. The litigants then exchanged a few casual remarks and parted.
    The libel suit was based upon an article in the Pacific Record-Herald and written by Fehl, following the raid on a Reese Creek still in which Everett Dahack of the Eagle Point district was slain. Alleged reference to Parr as "a murderer" was the basis of the suit. The trial lasted four days with a weekend recess and was hard fought throughout.
    Fehl has been editor of the paper for the past 10 or 12 years and an exponent of so-called "fearless journalism." It was his second appearance in a libel action, he having been acquitted by a jury in the first case.
    Considerable interest in the Parr action was taken in this city and Ashland, and in the Eagle Point district, where Everett Dahack lived and was well known.
Medford Mail Tribune, March 9, 1932, page 1


    The Pacific Record-Herald, weekly publication, Earl H. Fehl, editor, was closed late Saturday afternoon by Sheriff Ralph G. Jennings, upon an execution of judgment order for $15,000, the amount awarded by the jury last Wednesday in the libel suit instituted by Roy Parr, game warden.
    The execution of judgment was served by Sheriff Jennings, and the property and plant of the weekly placed formally in the hands of the sheriff, pending satisfaction of judgment or posting of stay bond for twice the amount of the judgment, pending decision in an appeal to the state supreme court if one is taken.
    The legal move was taken by attorney Allison Moulton, who with his brother, Arthur I. Moulton of Portland, represents Game Warden Parr, following the revocation by Circuit Judge H. D. Norton of that portion of the motion for 10 days in which to file a motion for a new trial that asked for a stay of judgment for ten days.
    It is understood that the action of Parr's attorneys was taken to forestall any legal move by Fehl, and it is also understood that L. Niedermeyer holds a mortgage on the Record-Herald plant and building with preference in the eyes of the law over the judgment for Parr, some lawyers hold.
    Under the law, it will be necessary for the sheriff to hold the weekly property and any other property in Fehl's name until the $15,000 judgment is satisfied or a settlement made.
    If Fehl's attorneys file an appeal to the state supreme court, they will have to file a stay bond of execution for twice the amount of the judgment, or $30,000.
     The execution of the judgment came as somewhat of a surprise as it was not generally expected that any steps would be taken until after ten days, when the court would rule on the motion for a new trial.
    Friends of the weekly editor stated last night that despite the closure, the Pacific Record-Herald would probably be issued as usual, from a printing plant other than its own.
    Fehl last night had no statement to make on the turn in the fortunes of his paper, or his future plans. The Pacific Record-Herald has been in existence for 15 years or more, under Fehl's management. It has had a rather stormy journalistic career, and the Parr libel suit was the second in its history--the first libel action, a criminal accusation, resulting in a circuit court jury returning an acquittal verdict.
    Parr's suit was based upon an article entitled "A Call to Arms" published the week following the fatal shooting of Everett Dahack during a liquor raid on a Resse Creek still, November 14, 1930. Serious and bitter charges and countercharges were hurled during and since the trial.
    It is considered certain that an appeal will be taken to the state supreme court on the alleged grounds of "excessive damages" and restriction of "the freedom of the press."
Medford Mail Tribune, March 13, 1932, page 1


    Suits for foreclosure of chattel and real estate mortgages against the Pacific Record-Herald, weekly newspaper; Earl H. Fehl, publisher; Mrs. Fehl, his wife; Roy Parr, game warden, and the Eagle Point Irrigation District were filed yesterday by Geo. M. Roberts, attorney for Niedermeyer, Inc., a Southern Oregon corporation headed by L. Niedermeyer of the West Side district. The action is understood as a necessary procedure to protect the Niedermeyer interests in the Fehl property against the $15,000 judgment awarded Officer Parr at the close of the libel suit against Mr. Fehl and the Pacific Record-Herald.
    The real estate mortgage held by Mr. Niedermeyer dates back to April 1, 1927, since which time Mr. Fehl has owed him $3500, plus interest at seven percent on the amount. The chattel mortgage on newspaper equipment is for $4000, and dates back to 1924.
    In addition to these sums, Mr. Niedermeyer asks payment of interest and attorney's fees.
    The Parr judgment, the complaint states, is subject to, inferior and subordinate to the superior right and interest of the plaintiff, Niedermeyer. The lien of the irrigation company on the Fehl property is also inferior to the Niedermeyer title, it is stated.
    The newspaper was closed down Saturday night by the Sheriff's office after Judge H. D. Norton of the circuit court rescinded the 10 days' stay of execution at first granted the defendant in the libel suit.
Medford Mail Tribune, March 17, 1932, page 2


    Motion for a new trial in the case of Roy Parr, game warden, vs. Earl H. Fehl and the Pacific Record-Herald was filed in circuit court late Friday afternoon by Fehl and his attorneys. Irregularity of the jury and of the adverse party and his attorneys is given as grounds.
    Officer Parr was awarded a judgment of $15,000 in the verdict of the jury in the recent libel suit, and the newspaper office was closed down one week ago by the sheriff's office in execution of the judgment. Fehl's attorneys state in the motion for a new trial that the verdict was excessive and "given under influence of bitter passion and prejudice."
    The motion is accompanied by seven affidavits submitted in attempt to show that the jury was prejudiced and indulged in irregularities. Most of them are aimed at statements made by Mrs. Max GeBauer.  One also implicates the foreman of the jury.
    The motion further states that the court "erred in its instructions to the jury, commenting upon the evidence," and "in submitting to the jury the question of special damages."
    The affidavits are signed by John Enright, Ted Wilson, A. C. Abrams, Darrell Huson, Harvey Grigsby, Mrs. Carrie Walker and Orlen R. Kring.
    Exhibits "eight" and "nine," signed by Fehl and his attorney, E. E. Kelly, also tend to show that the jury was prejudiced and did not base the verdict upon evidence produced during the trial.
    Abrams, who makes his home at the W. F. Campbell residence on East Main Street, in his affidavit refers to a conversation overheard there during which Mrs. GeBauer, he states, showed that "her attitude with respect to Mr. Fehl was a bitterly hostile and prejudiced one."
    Huson, who reports a conversation in his place of business on Sixth Street, credits Mrs. GeBauer with saying that the "verdict was not rendered upon the evidence in the case."
    Mrs. Carrie Walker further quotes her as saying "that I had my mind made up when I went on the jury."
    The other affidavits are of similar content, all endeavoring to show that the verdict was not drawn from evidence heard during the trial. Allison Moulton, attorney, with his brother, Arthur Moulton, of Portland, for Officer Parr, is mentioned as "hobnobbing with the jury in earnest conversation with the members."
    An exchange of aspirin tablets, lifesavers and other treats is referred to as further proof that the members of the jury were too friendly with the plaintiff and his attorney to retain fair minds during the trial.
    Fehl and the Pacific Record-Herald are represented by attorneys F. J. Newman, H. K. Hanna, T. J. Enright and Kelly & Kelly.
Medford Mail Tribune, March 20, 1932, page 1


    Counter-affidavits from all jurors in the libel suit of Roy Parr, game warden, against the Pacific Record-Herald and its editor, Earl H. Fehl, were filed Saturday in circuit court by Allison Moulton, attorney for Parr. Fehl's affidavits charged the jury that returned a $15,000 verdict against him with misconduct and prejudice.
    Each juror, including R. S. Daniels, foreman, averred under oath that he had never received any "lifesaver or candy" as charged, from plaintiff's counsel, which was the basis of the misconduct allegation, and all emphatically deny any prejudice against Fehl.
    Mrs. Myrtle GeBauer, woman member of the jury, accused of making prejudicial statements during the trial, makes denial in an affidavit she sets forth that she was in Huson's "What-Not" and read "a bitter attack on the Parr-Fehl jury, and particularly myself, which I took to be an effort to intimidate the jury," and the article was discussed. Mrs. GeBauer denies any statements credited to her by Mrs. Carrie Walker, Darrell Huson or William Gibson, detrimental to Fehl or his paper, and sets forth that these three affidavit-makers are either tenants or employees.
    Mrs. GeBauer also denies the affidavit of A. C. Abrams that she visited the home of Mrs. Francis Campbell, 604 East Main Street, on March 7th, while the trial was in progress, but she admits that she visited Mrs. Campbell on March 13, when they discussed the size of the verdict. She states she noticed Col. Abrams, but does not know whether or not he overheard the conversation. She asserts that after publication of his affidavit Abrams told her "he was sorry, it was printed, as I did not think it would be," and that at another time Col. Abrams became excited and said: "The judge has got to give him (Fehl) a new trial." The affidiant says that Abrams expressed a high admiration for Fehl. Mrs. GeBauer declares she entertains no prejudice against Fehl, and "voted for him for mayor."
    Mrs. GeBauer declares that while talking with attorney E. E. Kelly, during a trial recess, she was introduced to attorney Allison Moulton by him. Attorney Kelly is one of the counsel for Fehl. There was no conversation, Mrs. GeBauer says.
    Anderson Mee, another juror, files an affidavit denying that he ever told Orlen R. Kring that "three members of the jury were prejudiced." Mee also filed a second affidavit setting forth his place of residence and explaining this contention in the case as follows:
    "I, Anderson Mee, being first duly sworn on oath say: that I have been a resident of Jackson County, Oregon all of my life, and am 51 years old; that I have property and pay taxes in Jackson County Oregon, and do not have property or pay taxes in Josephine County; that I am a registered voter in Applegate Precinct in Jackson County, Oregon; that I have voted in Applegate Precinct in Jackson County since about 1920; that I have a mine known as the Black Bear in Jackson County, Oregon; that in August 1931 I moved temporarily into the house of S. L. Johnson which I believed until recently was in Jackson County, but which have been informed it is in Josephine County, Oregon, but I do not know positively of my own knowledge whether it is in Jackson County or Josephine County; that I have never had the intention of moving away from Jackson County, or changing my residence, and have always considered myself a resident of Jackson County, and am moving from the place where I am now staying in Mr. Johnson's house onto a place I have rented in Jackson County within the next few days; that since I have been in Mr. Johnson's house and until in December, I was employed from time to time working my mine, the Black Bear, which is in Jackson County, and at the time I moved into Mr. Johnson's house I did not have the intention to remain there and become a resident at that place but did have the intention of continuing my residence in Jackson County, where I had spent my life and where my property is located."
Medford Mail Tribune, March 27, 1932, page 1


    Earl H. Fehl, candidate for county judge, made a campaign speech last night at the armory to an audience of about 400 people, which included babes in arms, small boys, a number from the Eagle Point, Beagle, Sams Valley and Gold Hill districts, and residents of this city. People who attended in the expectation of excitement and a "showdown" were disappointed, the speaker of the evening stressing that he was "no more honest than anybody else, and I know all the county officials and they are all good men." Two or three times the candidate declared there "is nothing personal in my remarks."
    The keynote of Mr. Fehl's remarks was a "cleanup of the court house." He also discussed conditions he opposed in the construction of the courthouse, the renting of a steam shovel from Josephine County, the humane society, the unemployment relief work, county printing, the sheriff's office, the district attorney's office, the prohibition fund and things in general. Mr. Fehl alleged that "politicians would like to see me hung."
    At the conclusion of his speech a silver offering was taken, two of the hat-passers being Ezra Dahack and his son, Ernest, of Eagle Point. When the collection was counted Mr. Fehl said enough was donated to "break even" for hiring the hall and advertisements.
    At the start of the meeting Mr. Fehl praised William Gore for securing the O.-C. tax money for this county and that the county was niggardly in only giving him $5000. Commissioner Bursell arose to explain that Gore had received $17,000 for his Washington D.C. effort. Fehl declared; "This is my meeting." A portion of the audience emitted whoops and Commissioner Bursell remained quiet the rest of the evening.
    Hugo Daley, candidate for constable, made a speech at the start, setting forth his qualifications for the job and urging his hearers to vote for "a native son of Jackson County."
    Attorney T. J. Enright, Republican candidate for district attorney, closed the meeting. Mr. Enright said: "If elected I will not have any deputy around in the road and will dispense justice impartially and will uphold the Constitution."
    Mr. Fehl said he would make eight more speeches in the county, including a return speech here in the last days of the campaign.
Medford Mail Tribune, April 21, 1932, page 5


    To the Editor:
    There is going about in Jackson County a certain candidate, who formerly confined his vile remarks against Medford citizens, who were entrusted with its business affairs. He is now seeking to become county judge, using the same methods of gaining his hearer's ears.
    He is making all kinds of misstatements to serve his political needs in his campaign.
    He says the O. & C. funds have been squandered, when he knows the records show that in 1927 the county debt was reduced more than $611,000 in the retirement of bonds and warrants; that $312,495 was turned in to the school and road funds and $250,000 retained for the state's claim, and afterward transferred to the courthouse fund, later reduced by $10,000, which was transferred to the school fund deficit.
    He states the funds will be all gone when the courthouse is completed when he knows that there still remains a fund of $309,080.50 of O. & C. money in the treasurer's hands and partially invested in liberty, state and Jackson County bonds, enough to retire all but $66,000 of the bonds outstanding and due on or before 1952.
    All bonds that were purchased or canceled were secured at the then prevailing market price, to net 3½ percent, which is 1½ percent more than we were getting from the banks on daily deposits. You must remember we are paying 5 percent on outstanding bonds, and there is no danger of losing the funds during the period before they become due.
    He states the county received $92,000 of O. & C. money lately. He knows this was included in the 1931 estimates; that only $57,700 went to the county and the rest to school and road funds. The $57,700 will be used to take up 1931 warrants for cancellation.
    The budget for general and market roads, including receipts for 1931, amounted to $220,973.44, which was expended in an amount of one-half as the taxes were paid. In addition 11 road districts showed enough faith in the county court and its road organization to make special levies of more than $90,000 additional for special improvements in each district, except No. 5, which was presided over by W. H. Gore at its meeting, November 1930. 
    In February, 1931, a short time after road district No. 5 had failed to make a levy, Mr. Fehl and others called a meeting at the Grove school, Mr. Fehl acting as chairman, to start petitions for a West Side Highway through Mr. Gore's land, which after several days contained 30 names, while the remonstrance had 700 signatures--quite a rebuke to Mr. Fehl and Mr. Gore.
    This road would have cost $50,000 for right-of-way and fencing and an additional $100,000 to construct.
    Was Mr. Fehl thinking of you, Mr. Taxpayer, or tax reduction at that time? When he talked for a special levy for $700 on the Dark Hollow Road was he thinking of you? When the 6th Street improvements were made did it make any difference to 6th Street property owners' tax bill? Ask them, Mr. Home Owner!
   Mr. Fehl is trying to gain this responsible position by misrepresentation and vilification of your trusted employees, which you have elected two or three times and in whom you have shown most explicit faith. Why take Mr. Fehl's misstatements as correct? The county records are open to every taxpayer and you will find them well kept.
    There was collected during 1931 only 67 percent of all taxes levied and by closing down road work except maintenance we were able to close the year with every office having a balance on hand of $500 to $1500 each.
    Is Mr. Fehl the kind of man you want to say how your estate shall be handled for your loved ones?
    Do you want your child or relative's children to come before a man of his temperament in juvenile cases?
    Think well, Mr. Voter, when you go to the polls and remember "you get just what you vote for."
    (Signed)   VICTOR BURSELL
    Medford, April 23.     
Medford Mail Tribune, April 24, 1932, page 1


To the Editor:
    Mr. Fehl makes the statement that I was attending and attempting to break up his meetings. He had completed his meeting at Ashland and had asked for questions and invited anyone to speak. I accepted and was the last of several to talk.
    At the armory in Medford, I attempted to correct him once, only. When he stated that Mr. Gore had gone to Washington at his own expense of $20,000, he knew that Mr. Gore, as chairman of the committee, had received $12,000 from the 18 O. and C. counties' expense money and $5000 for services from Jackson County. He quotes an array of figures as premiums paid on bonds in 1927 and early in 1928. The total of these premiums was $31,000, which was a saving of $33,000 to the taxpayers by the time the bonds were matured over and above the daily balance of 2 percent received from the banks.
    He knows they were bought at the market price and by the advice of the three larger banks of Medford, including Mr. Fehl's friend, Mr. Gore, who loaned the writer a bankers' rate book for the court's benefit in purchasing bonds.
    Fehl knows that those transactions were before the 1928 elections in November, when the voters approved them by electing me a third term by a large majority.
    The writer does not want all the credit, as the court consisted of the late W. J. Hartzell, a former broker from Minneapolis, and Geo. Alford, former commissioner, a farmer, in addition to myself as the third member.
    Mr. Fehl stated at the Ashland meetings, and at the Medford meeting, that when the courthouse was completed, the last of the O. and C. funds would be gone. Then he admits that I stated facts when he said that $15,000 was invested in Liberty bonds and $56,000 in road bonds and the balance of the $309,000 in the Pacific Highway and Crater Lake Highway bond redemption funds. Would you believe what Mr. Fehl said at the armory, or the printed statement?
    Mr. Fehl doesn't deny that he was chairman of the West Side highway committee and started the petitions. He says there were no estimates made of cost. Did he think it could be built without cost to the taxpayers? What would he do as a member of the county court? Would he guess at the cost himself? Probably so, as he is opposed to any engineers.
    The Oregon laws of 1930, section 4556, provide that the county court is empowered to establish a road by resolution. This manner of establishing a road was not taken advantage of by the writer to establish the West Side highway, nor by any member of the court for personal gain. Would Mr. Fehl be as fair?
    Judge by his previous actions in the above matters and determine whether you can rely on any of his statements. My 1928 press statements show that I was opposed to any West Side highway, as I believed the Caves road was a much more needed road.
    Mr. Fehl said that he never urged a special levy by road petition, but he did not deny that he spoke for the levy at the Oak Grove school for his Dark Hollow Road, in the presence of many witnesses. He showed some faith in the road organization, but was not thinking of the taxpayers or reduction of taxes.
    Mr. Fehl advises the writer to read the probate law, which he has done many times, and finds that the probate or county judge can refuse to approve the granting of many things in estates which may become necessary to the heirs. Mr. Fehl states that the above is not an issue in this campaign, but that taxes on real property must be reduced, on which we are all agreed, since the 1929 collapse in commodity prices as well as farm products.
    The one question is why Mr. Fehl wanted the West Side highway at a cost of $150,000 in 1931, and limestone on the courthouse, necessitating a special levy of $17,500 for a jail.
    It has come to the attention of the writer that Mr. Fehl has made disparaging remarks against the late Judge Sparrow at several of his meetings; a man whom all knew, held in most profound respect and who was loved by the humblest and best among the Granges, townspeople and those in all walks of life. It is with shame for anyone to speak otherwise than with compassion and love.
    There are several candidates for county judge on the Republican ticket. All will be new to the work. Select the one best qualified to handle the business of the county as well as juvenile and probate work, remembering that he will have two commissioners to aid in the transaction of the county's business.
    Are you going to believe Mr. Fehl's misstatements?
    REMEMBER THAT YOU GET JUST WHAT YOU VOTE FOR.      
Medford, April 28.
Medford Mail Tribune, April 28, 1932, page 6


To the Editor:
    I have been asked repeatedly why I did not reply to the many accusations Mr. Earl Fehl, candidate for county judge--or is it sheriff?--and I have replied that I did not want to get into any tiresome, endless controversy with him, for I feel that the thinking people of this county realize that Mr. Fehl is just down on the world in general and that not a grand jury, special jury, regular jury, judge, court or official, both city or county, has escaped his tongue. I have no wish now or later to enter into a useless, ceaseless squabble, but there are a few things I would like to know.
    Up until after the Parr verdict, Fehl was friendly--or at least seemed to be, insofar as he is capable--to me. In fact, during the trial he made the statement on the witness stand that he had the highest respect for me and my boys. He also talked to me about having one of my deputies run on the Republican ticket suggesting that she would get the nomination and then make no campaign and I would be elected. When I said that there was no time to circulate petitions he said that he would pay the $20 filing fee. I am not attempting to discredit Mr. Fehl in his race for county judge, as I am and always have been an advocate of a clean, decent campaign and ready to stand on my record and my qualifications.
    Mr. Fehl became angered because I closed his place of business--the Pacific Record-Herald--when he knew that that was one of the duties of my office and I had no choice in the matter. After the verdict in the Parr case he was given a ten-day stay of execution and immediately attempted to transfer his property, which was the reason that the stay of execution was canceled, and an execution ordered to take effect at once. This I was called upon to serve and I thereupon followed instructions of the attorney as I do in all legal matters. I was liable under my bond if these instructions were not carried out. The attorney stated at that time that it must be done on Saturday to overcome the possibility of the machinery being moved on Sunday.
    When I went to Fehl's establishment to levy the execution according to my instructions, Fehl, for some unknown reason, blamed me for the whole affair and made the following threat, "Ralph Jennings, you are not re-elected yet, and if I can prevent it, you never will be."
    As for the prohibition fund regarding which he rants so much--he knows that this fund is checked by every grand jury and surely he wouldn't intimate that every one on every grand jury is crooked. This fund has been the cause of more controversy and trouble than any other of the duties of my office, but the manner in handling it is prescribed by law, and it cannot be avoided. Also the prohibition work has not cost the taxpayers of this county one penny, for it is made up of fines largely taken from professional bootleggers and still owners. Each year an amount averaging around $2000, over and above enforcement costs, is turned over to the general fund of the county, which does not happen in many counties of this state. As I have stated before through the press, the sum of $1,456.07 referred to so often by Fehl represents the expenditure of four months, covered by 45 vouchers.
    I have spent the last seven years at this job and I am confronted with new problems every day. I am wondering how many fully realize the many details of this office. During the year 1931, the sum of $1,362,833.80 was collected in the tax department. All segregation of funds into school districts, cities and irrigation districts are made in this department, about 25,000 tax receipts are written and last year over 6000 delinquent notices were sent out. Previous to my entering office in 1925 a force of four deputies was kept in the tax department all summer, while we are now getting along with one.  We have also devised a system by which the tax receipts are written by three girls instead of six as was formerly needed.
    There has been no increase in the force of the legal department in spite of the fact that the work has trebled in the last 10 years. There are many who do not know that every animal sold to a butcher must carry a tag, and we wait on an average of 15 persons a day for this service alone. Everyone selling more than 10 chickens or turkeys must procure a tag. The automobile license work has increased from $32,230.05 in 1923 to $116,946.84 in 1931, and during that time many new laws, such as the title law, have been enacted making far more work. During the year 1922, 808 legal papers of various kinds (chattel liens, writs, summons, executions, subpoenas, etc.) were served, while in 1931 there were 1972 cases.
    Upon this office also falls the service of jury summons, the making of deeds, delivering of ballot boxes and the checking of polling places. In 1922 there was no collection of unsecured personal tax through the legal department and in the year 1931 the amount collected was $13,363.23.
    I have been censured for having my boys work for me. I consider them my greatest asset. They tend strictly to business, have my best interest at heart, and I know that I can trust them. I believe that any attorney in this county will unhesitatingly recommend them.
    At the present time I collect in litigants in court when I serve papers, mileage at the rate of 10 cents per mile, one-half of the mileage fees so collected goes into the general county fund and I receive only five cents per mile for cars used in this service. In 1922 the sum of $504.19 was turned over to the county general fund for mileage fees collected from litigants, and in 1931 the sum of $1805.75 was turned over to the county for that item.
    In 1923 the budget called for $15,683 and $20,807.63 was spent.
    In 1931 the budget called for $19,413 and $18,622.06 was spent.
    I have tried to build up an efficient, economical, capable organization, and this is not accomplished in one day or one year. I will admit that we have made mistakes, but we have profited by them. My office force has always worked in harmony and we have attempted to give courteous, quick service and I have tried personally to work for the good of all. If re-elected I cannot promise more than I have promised before--and given--my best effort in an endeavor to give you an honest, efficient administration.
Medford, May 9.
Medford Mail Tribune, May 10, 1932, page 2


    A. W. Pipes, former mayor of Medford, today challenged Earl Fehl, candidate for county judge in the Republican primaries, to open the files of his newspaper, the Record-Herald, to the people so that certain views he has held toward local issues and local citizens in the past might be generally known.
    Mr. Pipes would particularly like the editorial of Mr. Fehl on the Kingsley murder case, also on law enforcement and bootleggers. He believes the people are entitled to know how the candidate for judge has regarded such important questions in the past, and therefore can be expected to regard them in the future.
    "I challenge Mr. Fehl," said the former mayor, "to bring forth these articles and again publish them, so that the voters may know just where he stands on matters of such public concern. Isn't this a fair request to make of a man who wants to hold the most important office in Jackson County?
    "I have no personal enmity toward Mr. Fehl. I have no wish to harm him by insinuations and innuendos and make none. All I ask are facts which are matters of record. His stand and his utterances in these matters are a matter of record, in the columns of his newspaper, and I simply ask that he make that record known.
    "The county judgeship is one of the most important, if not THE most important office to be filled at the coming election. The people are entitled to all the facts concerning every candidate for that office. They are not only entitled to know Mr. Fehl's view on public issues in the past, they are entitled to know his business record, his record on public questions in his own home town.
    "What is his business record? Let the people look up that record. Where did Mr. Fehl stand more than a decade ago when Medford was in serious financial difficulties and her bonds were in default? The city administration at that time devised a refinancing plan which saved the city's credit. This plan was later approved by a vote of the people.
    "Where did Mr. Fehl stand on that question? He opposed the plan which saved his city from disaster. More than that, he carried his fight to the courts. He says he is a dear friend of the Medford taxpayers. Was he a dear friend of the Medford taxpayers? Let the people figure out how much Mr. Fehl cost them. How much did his fight on the water system cost them? How much did his attitude in other public questions cost them?
    "Have we as taxpayers and property owners any right to believe that Mr. Fehl, if elected judge, would exercise any better judgment in protecting the interests of the taxpayers of Jackson County than he did the taxpayers of Medford? Is he the type of man to select to administer our property affairs or the affairs of our loved ones? Is he the type to select to run our private business, or to sit in judgment over boys and girls in the juvenile court?
    "By his record of the past let us judge him. I say this with no animus or malice, but because I believe that where a candidate for public office has a public record, that record should be known. In the files of Mr. Fehl's Record-Herald is his record. I challenge him to open the files of that paper through republication in the newspapers of the county. If he refuses to do so, then the people can draw their own conclusions."
Medford Mail Tribune, May 10, 1932, page 10


    The following article completes the thumbnail sketches of candidates for public office on the Republican ticket at the May 20 primary.
    Earl B. Day, incumbent, Sams Valley farmer; active in Grange; member American Legion, recognized as rising rural district leader; attended last session legislature and desires second term. Made good record. Conscientious, hard-working and able. No. 47 on ballot.
    William N. Carl, farm owner of Applegate, called "Farmer Bill" by acquaintances in Jackson and Josephine counties; picturesque talker. Not very well known outside own home circles. Member of Grange. Pledged to "guard your legislative needs." No. 46 on ballot.
    Victor Bursell, stockman and farmer, completing third term as county commissioner; has been 49 years in valley;  recognized as best-informed man in county regarding county affairs; born in Nebraska; member of Grange; not fluent but convincing talker; raises hay on farm near Central Point; well-known, competent and able. No. 45 on ballot.
    George W. Porter, 40 years a resident of city and valley; operates a lumber yard; served in several civic capacities; now member city council; good-natured but firm, well-known and shrewd business man. Very proud of his grandson. Member of Elks, Masons, etc., etc. No. 48 on ballot.
    T. J. Enright, lawyer, resident here about 10 years; native of Iowa, where he held secretarial position with L. J. Dickinson, keynote speaker of Republican Party; saw service in Washington D.C. offices; in army during war; defense counsel in several prominent local criminal and civil cases past two years; member American Legion; knows lots of people; aggressive and combative type. No. 50 on ballot.
    William M. Briggs, Jr., native son of Ashland, well known, particularly in south end of county; graduate of Ashland schools and U. of O.; served term in state legislature; associated with father-in-law business; member American Legion; studious type, but good jury lawyer. No. 40 on ballot.
    C. B. Lamkin, incumbent, named by governor last January to fill vacancy caused by death of Alex Sparrow; born in New York state; spent boyhood on Iowa farm. Served in Iowa legislature and co-worker of Senator A. B. Cummins. Resident of Ashland 25 years; three times elected mayor; member of school board, bank director, farm owner entire life; conservative type, with plenty of political and business experience; member of Masons and [omission] campaigner, fearless and conscientious. No 53 on ballot.
   C. A. Thomas, identified with lumber business in Southern Oregon 12 years; well known among laboring class and mill workers; former yard superintendent Owen-Oregon plant; held position with other lumber concerns, lives in Ashland, formerly lived here, not as well known as majority of candidates, but made good impression during campaign and has had considerable business experience. Only candidate to say good word for President Hoover in slogan; favors middle course between economy and extravagance. No. 54 on ballot.
    A. H. Willett, resident of Talent several years, where owns small farm; former resident Portland and Kansas; personal friend of Governor Julius L. Meier, but not supporter; extensive business and executive experience; member of Masons and Shriners. Solid substantial type, but good mixer. No. 55 on ballot.
    Earl H. Fehl, 25 years a resident of valley, a goodly portion of time running weekly newspaper; five times unsuccessful candidate for mayor of Medford; storm center of a score of local controversies. Instigator of legal suits against city on water, sewer and paving questions over long period; twice in court on libel actions; once acquitted, last time jury returned verdict of $15,000 against him, and judgement executed. Case now pending on appeal to supreme court. Militant, with many warm supporters and better known in this city than rest of county. Only candidate actively on the stump. Tireless worker for own cause; chairman of Muncie plan committee; instrumental in construction of Holly Theater and opening Sixth Street. An "out," who perpetually crusades against the "ins." No. 51 on ballot.
    Earl C. Gaddis, former mayor of Medford, long-time resident of city. Administration under almost constant fire of Fehl. Many valley farms surrounded by Page fence he and Volney Dixon sold; conservative type, good business man, well-known among the older residents of valley; active civic worker many years; belongs to several civic organizations and fraternal orders; conservative, competent and friendly. No 52 on ballot.
    William E. (Shorty) Morris, native of Missouri, successful raiser of sugar beets in Colorado and lima beans in the Imperial Valley, Calif., fishing and wrestling fan; operates farm near Table Rock. Resident here 10 years, popular, fairly well known, once a drummer, knows men and business methods; enterprising and energetic; member of Elks and a Granger; married. No. 57 on ballot.
    Louis M. Sweet, farmer, Sams Valley resident for 20 years; known to many by contentious letters he has written to newspapers over that period; close student of county affairs and taxes; only candidate in field running on Meier platform; Granger, sociable, and former field deputy for assessor. Will listen to reason, and admit error if convinced he's wrong. No. 58 on ballot.
    Ralph Billings, native son of Ashland; member of pioneer family; farmer, well known in southern end of county. Defeated in 1930 for same post. Hard worker, substantial type, member of Kiwanis, Elks and other organizations. Not an orator, but with a reputation of doing whatever he sets out to do well. No 56 on the ballot.
    George R. Carter, resident of valley for 45 years, coming here as a little boy. Farmed in Talent district and had stock ranch in Dead Indian country for many years. Steady, conscientious; managed Medford Ice Co. for many years, was also field deputy in assessor's office; knows Jackson County folks through wide acquaintance. Married, has two boys. No. 59 on ballot.
    Delilia Stevens Meyer, incumbent, experienced, efficient, accommodating; native daughter of Jackson County, first public appearance in school play staged by Roosevelt School students. Deputy clerk under Chauncey Florey. Established new methods in handling clerk's office and drastically cut overhead. No. 60 on ballot.
Medford Mail Tribune, May 12, 1932, page 9


    In the suit of Niedermeyer, Inc., against Earl H. Fehl, the Pacific Record-Herald, a weekly newspaper, Sheriff Ralph G. Jennings, the Eagle Point Irrigation District, and Roy M. Parr, Fehl, through his attorneys Saturday afternoon filed an answer and counter-claim alleging that L. Niedermeyer owes him the sum of $22,410.60 for services and labor.
    Fehl alleges in his counter-claim that Niedermeyer owes him $5,225 as his share of the lot upon which the Holly Theater stands, $10,000 for promotional efforts before the Holly Theater was started, and $7,185.60 for supervision of the construction of the theater and labor performed thereon.
    It is set forth that Fehl, in the promotion of the Holly Theater structure, made numerous trips to Portland and San Francisco, conferring with architects and moving picture interests, and that he was instrumental in the securing of the ornamental street lights on Sixth Street and that he secured a bonded lease of the theater to Walter H. Leverette for ten years for $65,000. Fehl also avers that he secured Frank and King Comedians, a tent show, to hold forth on the Holly site to demonstrate its fitness as an amusement place location.
    Fehl alleges that he took the initiative in purchasing the lot from the Knights of Pythias lodge and put up an option, afterwards interesting Niedermeyer in the theater project. He asks $5,225 as a half interest in the lot.
    For supervision of the construction of the Holly Theater, which cost $71,185.60, Fehl asks ten percent of the total cost, or $7,185.60 [sic].
    Fehl sets forth that he toiled in several capacities during a period of 18 months in arranging for and building the Holly Theater, and secured tenants after it was erected.
    The answer says that the dealings, now in controversy, were negotiated with L. Niedermeyer as an individual and that afterwards Niedermeyer, Inc., was formed.
    In opposition to the $22,410.60 claim of Fehl, Niedermeyer, Inc., in its complaint admits that Fehl worked for approximately 236 days and claims that $10 per day is a fair wage, which they are willing to deduct from the mortgage against Fehl and his printing house and equipment.
    The amount involved in the mortgage is approximately $4,400.
    Sheriff Jennings and the Eagle Point Irrigation District are named defendants in a minor legal capacity, and Roy M. Parr is named as the holder of a $15,000 libel suit judgment. Niedermeyer Inc., holds that their mortgage holds precedence over the libel suit judgment execution.
    Fehl is represented by attorneys H. K. Hanna, T. J. Enright and Kelly and Kelly. Niedermeyer Inc., is represented by aAttorney George M. Roberts and William McAllister.
   The plaintiff, by a ruling of Circuit Judge E. C. LaTourette of Oregon City last Monday, is allowed five days in which to file a reply to the answer, after which the case will come to a hearing in circuit court.
Medford Mail Tribune, July 3, 1932, page 1


    Niedermeyer, Inc., today filed a reply to the answer of Earl H. Fehl and the Pacific Record-Herald in their suit for the collection of a promissory note and chattel mortgage for $6,443.98, less payments and deductions. Fehl in his answer and counterclaim, filed a week ago, alleged approximately $22,000 was due him from Niedermeyer, Inc., for labor, services and promotional efforts.
    The reply sets forth that Fehl has no interest of any kind in the Niedermeyer, Inc., or the Holly Theater; that in its construction he acted only "in the capacity of foreman and was paid an amount in excess of the reasonable value therefor" and that no agreement, verbal or oral, was entered into between L. Niedermeyer and Fehl and that Fehl "should be estopped in good conscience and equity," from declaring otherwise.
    It is also asserted that Fehl declared that he would not accept any fee or commission, but that L. Niedermeyer insisted that he be paid, and the same deducted from the promissory note and chattel mortgage.
    The reply holds that Frank C. Clark, architect, was in charge of the Holly construction and supervised the same and that L. Niedermeyer furnished money for payment of contracts and bills. It is admitted that Niedermeyer provided $22,988 which Fehl disbursed for labor and small items. The reply further alleges that Fehl held no realty dealer license, as required by state law, and that during the construction of the Holly he was engaged in other "building enterprises, and the editing of a weekly paper."
    It is set forth that from 1919 to 1927, Fehl "constantly solicited, implored and requested" Niedermeyer to build a theater at Sixth and Holly streets and in 1927 Niedermeyer permitted Fehl to start excavating and that when a lease was signed with Walter Leverette, the excavation was finished. Niedermeyer, in all these negotiations, assumed the financial and other responsibilities.
    The reply admits Fehl paid $100 earnest money on the lot to the Talisman Lodge of Knights of Pythias of which W. R. Gaylord was chancellor, and that Niedermeyer afterwards paid $9,650 for the land in two installments and that the $100 paid by Fehl was deducted from the promissory note.
    The reply avers that Niedermeyer insisted on Fehl accepting payment for services, when Fehl claimed that "the enhancement of property values on Sixth Street" would be his recompense. The sum of $2300 was applied to the note on these grounds, with the consent of Fehl.
    It is set forth further that claims of Fehl that he was instrumental in securing the Sixth Street lighting system, or a tent show to hold forth on the site, are not supported by information at hand.
    It is also recited that Fehl interested Niedermeyer in the construction of the Ivy Street Market, and dismissal is asked on the grounds of "insufficiency of cause."
    Fehl in his answer and counterclaim alleged he had due $7,150 as a fee for construction of the Holly Theater, $10,000 for various promotional efforts, and $5000 as a half-interest in the lot upon which the theater stands.
    Niedermeyer, Inc., is represented by attorneys George M. Roberts and William McAllister; Fehl by attorneys H. K. Hanna, T. J. Enright and Kelly and Kelly.   
Medford Mail Tribune, July 8, 1932, page 1


    Earl H. Fehl was on the witness stand this afternoon, and for a short period before the noon recess he gave a history of his business relations with L. Niedermeyer, from their inception.
    Fehl testified that Niedermeyer financed the founding of the Pacific Record-Herald, and that the primary object of its birth was to secure publicity against the proposed plan to include land near Jacksonville in an irrigation district project.
    Fehl at the start of the afternoon testified that his negotiations for the purchase of the Holly Theater lot were "upon a partnership basis."
    With the conclusion of Fehl's testimony as a defendant, both sides will open the presentation of rebuttal testimony.
    Hearing of testimony in the civil action of Niedermeyer, Inc., against Earl H. Fehl and the Pacific Record-Herald, for collection of a promissory note and chattel mortgage, approximating $5000, began this morning in circuit court before Judge Earl C. LaTourette of Oregon City, assigned to the case by the state supreme court when the defense filed an affidavit of prejudice against Circuit Court Judge H. D. Norton.
    Louis Niedermeyer, head of Niedermeyer, Inc., was the first witness and detailed negotiations in which Fehl played a part, that led to the construction of the Holly Theater on Sixth Street, starting in November, 1929.
    Niedermeyer testified to transactions and verbal agreements between himself and Fehl over a period of years, and testified that after the foundation and excavating was well underway he asked Fehl what his charge would be for services and Fehl replied that the enhancement of Sixth Street property values would be his reward.
    Niedermeyer testified that he refused to operate upon this basis and informed Fehl, "You will have to quit, unless you make a charge." It was then agreed that Fehl should be paid at the rate of $10 per day, the total to be deducted from the note obligation. Niedermeyer testified that Fehl worked 223 days and that $2230 was credited on the note.
    Niedermeyer testified that Fehl acted in the capacity of a general foreman and that Niedermeyer himself attended to all other transactions, such as making of contracts, and that Frank C. Clark of this city was the supervising architect.
    William H. Miller and Col. R. I. Stuart, contractors, F. C. Clark, architect, Ed White, realtor and other local residents were scheduled to be called as plaintiff's witnesses.
    The decision in the case, according to lawyers, will have a bearing on the status of the judgment executed by Roy Parr, game warden, in a $15,000 libel suit verdict. The Niedermeyer, Inc., claim on Fehl and his newspaper now holds legal priority.
    It is the general contention of Niedermeyer, Inc., that Fehl has no claim. Fehl, through his counsel, contends in a counterclaim that he has due a sum greater than the amount of the chattel mortgage.
    Niedermeyer, Inc., is represented by attorneys George M. Roberts and William McAllister and Fehl by attorneys T. J. Enright and Kelly and Kelly.
    It is expected that the hearing of testimony will be completed by tomorrow noon.
Medford Mail Tribune, July 25, 1932, page 1


    Earl H. Fehl, chief witness for the defense in the civil suit of Niedermeyer, Inc., against him to collect a $5000 chattel mortgage and promissory note, was excused this morning after nearly a day in the witness chair. Fehl was questioned briefly by the court before dismissal as a witness.
    Fehl in the testimony related the alleged business relations existing between him and L. Niedermeyer over a period of 13 years, starting with the inception of the Pacific Record-Herald in 1919.
    Fehl contends his efforts on behalf of the Holly Street theater in 1929 were on a "partnership basis," as far as the purchase of the lot was concerned, and that he is entitled to commissions on other transactions.
    Niedermeyer, Inc., contends that Fehl acted only in the capacity of a foreman, signed no contracts and furnished no money.
    Dr. J. F. Reddy was called as a witness and in response to a hypothetical question pronounced by the defense said that for promotional work for a $75,000 theater, a minimum of $10,000 and a maximum of $15,000 was "fair." Dr. Reddy testified that he had been in promotional work for 40 years, more or less, and had once owned a theater. The witness said that the amount of the commission would be based on services performed. Fehl testified that he made trips and worked on the Holly Theater promotion for a period of two years.
    Dr. W. H. Everhard, attorney F. J. Newman and a number of carpenters and artisans employed on the Holly Theater were scheduled to be called as witnesses by the defense today.
Medford Mail Tribune, July 26, 1932, page 1


    The political pot in Jackson County started simmering anew the past week with rumors and counter-rumors of Independent candidates entering the list between now and 45 days before the general election, or about September 15th.
    One of the most persistent rumors of the week was that John Dennison of this city would make an Independent race for sheriff. Dennison was prominently mentioned before the primary campaign as a candidate but refused, and friends say he has not changed his mind.
    Lowell Zundel, who stated ten days ago that he had sufficient signatures to his petitions as an Independent sheriff candidate, as yet has not filed.
    There has been considerable whispering up the political alleys the past week, but as yet nothing has come of them.
    An interesting political reaction to the Judge Norton recall plot came to light last week when Arthur E. Powell, editor of the Central Point American, announced his withdrawal of support to the county judge candidacy of Earl H. Fehl, Republican primary nominee, as follows;
    "This week he heard a man, who had been a strong follower of Earl H. Fehl and L. A. Banks, make the remark that 'Fehl and Banks have sure queered themselves now. If Fehl has no more sense than to take the attitude he has regarding the recall of Judge Norton, he has no place on the county court.' We think this man is right. We can see nothing to this recall matter but disgruntled litigants' attempted revenge for fancied wrongs. We had hoped Mr. Fehl would be above such things. And so long as he persists in his attitude and insists on following Banks' lead, we shall be compelled by honesty to withdraw from his support for County Judge.
    "The man we need for County Judge must be a man of well-balanced mind, one who can see both sides of a question and who can calmly sit in judgment on the problems confronting him daily without allowing personal prejudice to interfere with his decisions. We fear Mr. Fehl cannot measure up to that standard."
    Widespread disapproval and disfavor of the abortive recall plot directed against Circuit Court Judge H. D. Norton continued to be manifested throughout Jackson and Josephine counties the past week. From those had seen the petition circulators, and the petitions, it was learned yesterday that the signers were few, and the rebukes many. Suburban service stations where petitions were left also gained few names. It was reported disgust with the scheme was strong among both country and city people.
    The sponsors of the recall are still in the dark, but public opinion generally attributed it "to a few disgruntled litigants and revengeful politics." One local report said that "women were to blame," but this was regarded as a move to "pass the buck."
    The Gold Hill News made an effort to determine the recall sentiment in that city and reported as follows:
    "In an effort to determine the sentiment locally regarding the petition which was circulated here last week, this paper made a canvass of Main Street Wednesday and so far as we were able to learn not a single name was gained in the business district, although one lady who saw the petition said there were probably ten names on it which the circulators said they had obtained in Gold Hill. This lady said she did not read the names and only judged the number from the approximate space which they took up, as she told the circulators that she was not interested in signing it.
    "The two ladies circulating the petition asked if they might leave the petition at Chris Jorgensen's pool room but were told they could not. Mr. Jorgensen also emphatically refused to sign it.
    "The Delta Café was also requested to let the petition be left there but declined.
    "The News office was not visited by the two ladies, and we could not learn who the backers were. One of the ladies, however, said that she was the mother of a boy who had received an unjust sentence in Judge Norton's court.
    "Reports from Rogue River district persist in stating that the petitions are being well signed there, however, although nearer Grants Pass less success is being met with."
Medford Mail Tribune, August 28, 1932, page 1


    In a public statement issued today, attorneys for E. H. Fehl in the hearing of his libel suit before Judge Norton emphatically denied that Judge Norton had been unfair or biased in his conduct of that trial.
    The statement signed by all of Mr. Fehl's attorneys follows:
    "We, the undersigned, represented Mr. Fehl in his libel suit. We believe conduct of the trial by Judge Norton was entirely fair. We felt that on the showing made he should have granted a new trial. But while disappointed at his refusal to do so, we agree that this was a matter for the court, not for his attorneys to decide. We believe his decision was based on the amendment to the state constitution which makes it illegal for a court to grant a new trial where there is a scintilla of evidence to support the verdict, except where there is misconduct on the part of the jurors, or errors by law by the court during the trial. We find no fault and have found no fault with Judge Norton's conduct of the case. We believed him throughout the trial entirely fair, unfailingly courteous and absolutely impartial.
    "The verdict was shocking and entirely out of reason, but the people by their amendment have taken from the court the power to grant new trials where passion and prejudice have swayed jurors.
    "H. K. Hanna
    "T. J. Enright
    "F. J. Newman
    "Kelly & Kelly"
Medford Mail Tribune, September 11, 1932, page 1


    In a speech at the Armory Friday night, before a crowd of approximately 300, Earl H. Fehl, primary nominee for county judge, cast serious imputations upon the judicial integrity of Circuit Court Judge H. D. Norton, and alleged that the jurist had given him assurances that the Parr libel suit "was nothing to worry about," "there is not a word of libel in it," and "I'll dismiss the case."
    Fehl alleged that Judge Norton--"who was my friend and neighbor--led me into a trap, and then sprang the trap."
    A court reporter, W. J. Looker, made a stenographic record of his utterances, and near the end of his speech Fehl remarked, "I may be held to an accounting for my words here tonight."
    Fehl alleged by inference that he had been led to believe from the asserted words of Judge Norton that the Parr libel suit would be dismissed.
   During his speech Fehl cited all the cases in Jackson County that have been listed as "miscarriages of justice" save one, stressed the two Central Point bank robbery episodes and the case of Evan Crow, now serving two years in state prison. He did not go into the details of the Crow sentence, except to charge it was "a police frameup."
    Fehl told the history of his legal troubles, from the start of his weekly to the verdict in the Parr libel suit. He excoriated what he called "the Liberty Building gang," naming A. W. Pipes as the leader. He also flayed Deputy District Attorney George A. Codding as the instigators of his troubles. He paid a glowing tribute to Attorney E. E. Kelly, who was one of his counsel.
    During the course of his address, Fehl made frequent quotations from the Bible, which he said "is the only book I ever owned."
    The relations between Fehl and Judge Norton, up to the time the Parr libel suit was brought, were described. He said "Judge Norton frequently came to my office and smoked cigarettes as fast as he could stick them in his face," that "I gave him a turkey for Christmas," and "his mansion is the product of my brains and his money." He claimed he had been instrumental in the election of Judge Norton.
    At the outset of his speech, Fehl said, "I have delayed starting this meeting waiting for my former friend, Judge Norton, to appear, as I say nothing behind a man's back I won't say to his face."
    Fehl admitted he signed the recall. "Much has been said about who was the father of the recall. It makes no difference who started it--it's been started." He said he hoped "all will sign the recall if you get a chance."
    The speaker surprised his hearers by declaring "The Mail Tribune has always treated me nice. It's one of the finest papers on the Pacific Coast--or anywhere. If they start fighting for the common people, instead of the gang, I'll quit trying to run a newspaper."
    At the conclusion of his speech, the hat was passed to pay the expenses, which he said were $15. Fehl said he intended to make speeches throughout the county, and "this is my only appearance in this city, unless there is a demand for another."
    Many in the audience were from the county districts--particularly the Rogue River and Gold Hill regions.
Medford Mail Tribune, September 11, 1932, page 1


To the Editor:
    Just a thought or two on the Fehl accusations:
    It is one of the ethical ideals of American jurisprudence that all stand equal in contemplation of law and before the courts.
     Mr. Fehl is a candidate himself for a judicial position of the highest importance in that it deals with the estates of those who have passed on and in a large way holds the destiny of the widow and orphan. To anyone who knows Judge Norton and who has conducted litigation before him Mr. Fehl's statements are absurd, but they at least disclose Mr. Fehl's attitude of mind and his ideals. They reveal that the now high-minded friend of downtrodden justice in Jackson County was ready and willing to take advantage of his friendly relations with the court and secure from the court a biased and unwarranted dismissal of a lawsuit without even granting to the other side its day in court. In other words, Mr. Fehl expected to capitalize his friendship with the court, and because this relation did not return dividends in the way of judicial favors, he now seeks to recall the judge, obviously in the hope of securing one more amenable to "influence."
    It seems to us that Mr. Fehl, in his attack upon Judge Norton, has rendered one service to the electorate of Jackson County. He has disclosed his own standards of judicial fairness and honesty and has stamped himself as wholly unfit to occupy the high office which he seeks.
    In the Central Point bank holdup, in one case a deadly firearm was used; the other case was a simple case of embezzlement by a young man who yielded to temptation. Penalties are fixed by the legislature and not by the judge, and the gravity of the charge is often lessened by the sort of indictment returned by the grand jury.
                    U.S.A.
                        (Name on file.)
"Communications," Medford Mail Tribune, September 11, 1932, page 4


    Earl H. Fehl, Republican primary nominee for county judge, in a campaign speech at Lake Creek last Wednesday night spoke to an audience of 15 people, nine of whom signed the nominating petitions of C. E. Gates for county judge, according to Lloyd Damon of that section, who counted noses and circulated the Gates petition at the meeting. Damon says there were 20 people outside the hall, visiting and discussing the problems of the day among themselves.
    Thomas R. Farlow, pioneer stockman of the district, attended the meeting and said, "There were a few more than a dozen in the hall," and that he declined to offer to be chairman of the meeting. Farlow said, "Quite a bunch of the boys were outside."
    At a primary meeting held by Fehl in the Lake Creek district last spring, close to 200 people heard him flay the "ins," allege "injustice," and appeal for sympathy. The change in sentiment in the Lake Creek district is viewed as typical of the entire rural section of the county and a sign that the voters have become weary of the "political revolution," and "collapse of justice" talk.
    There has been a noticeable "soft-pedaling" the past ten days of well-known and oft-told charges, reflecting on county officials and particularly in the Judge Norton recall plot. Fehl, in his Lake Creek speech, devoted himself chiefly to "my policies if elected county judge." In his three previous speeches he hurled allegations at Judge Norton. General public revulsion to the fatherless recall scheme is widespread. Fehl in Medford speeches boasted he had signed the recall petition and urged others to follow suit. Fehl also declared in his last Medford talk that he would not support the national head of the Republican ticket in November.
    Circulators of the recall petitions were still circulating the past week. A woman, seeking names on the petition at Ashland, informed the Ashland Tidings that she had secured 93 names after two weeks' work. A newspaper solicitor visited the Foots Creek district Tuesday, and sought subscriptions and signatures, and attacked Judge Norton. As far as known there are only a half dozen circulators, a majority being "disgruntled litigants," or kin to defendants who received adverse decisions in the circuit court.
Medford Mail Tribune, September 25, 1932, page 1


    The situation before the election in Jackson County today is very similar to the situation preceding the primary election last May.
    There is no question that a majority of the people of Jackson County don't want Earl Fehl for county judge.
    There was no question before the primary that a majority of the REPUBLICAN voters did not want Mr. Fehl as their candidate for county judge.
     But then as NOW, there was no unanimity as to how to defeat him. There were five candidates for county judge in the primaries--the Fehl opposition was split four ways. Every effort was made to get some of these candidates to withdraw and throw their support to others. But none of them would. Then, as NOW, THEY ALL THOUGHT THEY WOULD BE NOMINATED, AND THEIR PARTISAN SUPPORTERS THOUGHT LIKEWISE.
    As a result Earl Fehl won the nomination. He received 2425 votes. His nearest competitor, Judge Lamkin, received 2075 votes. Gaddis received 1165 votes, Thomas 697, Willetts 637. In other words 2425 Republicans wanted Fehl, 4574 REPUBLICANS DIDN'T WANT HIM. But because those 4574 voters refused to forget their political and personal preferences, refused to get together--the man they opposed WON.
    Now it is apparent--that if ONLY 175 VOTES had been switched from any of the weaker candidates to Judge Lamkin, who was unquestionably the strongest candidate, Lamkin would have won--and a large part of this noise and fury that has torn Jackson County wide open all these months would have been avoided. That was the writer's opinion then, but the Mail Tribune unfortunately did not enter the primary this year, and like most other papers in the state never has supported or opposed primary candidates. NEVER AGAIN!
    Now the Fehl opposition is split three ways instead of four. The same effort has been made to make one of the candidates withdraw. But none have. They are all going to be elected now just as the primary candidates were.
    And unless there IS some concentration behind the strongest opposing candidate, unless this opposition is not again scattered three ways to breakfast, then take our tip; Earl Fehl with his solid backing is going to win.
    Don't be deceived. The Mail Tribune isn't. We know what the street talk is; we know what the straw ballots indicated--that Gates, Codding and Beeson are the strongest anti-Fehl candidates. But we ALSO know that the minority support Fehl enjoyed in the primaries and is his today did not PARTICIPATE in the straw ballot; it is a silent vote, but it is a CERTAIN one. It is going to the polls 100 percent strong tomorrow. And unless there is a last-minute switch to the strongest opposing candidate, political history in the primaries will be repeated again.
    Now there is nothing political or personal in this paper's opposition to Mr. Fehl. Although he has spent most of his time the past decade or so slinging mud at this paper, we have never said anything to reflect upon his standing as a private citizen, or his moral character. We don't oppose Fehl in his private capacity; we do oppose him as a candidate for public office. Our opposition rests FIRST upon our BELIEF that he is ENTIRELY UNQUALIFIED for public office, and is PARTICULARLY UNQUALIFIED by temperament and character for the position of a JUDGE.
    SECOND, that the things he represents, the political methods he sanctions and uses, are wrong, economically destructive, have done this community great harm, and if endorsed by the people and consequently continued, will do irreparable INJURY--render any constructive progress in this community when prosperity does return PRACTICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
    Nor is there anything personal or partisan in our support of C. E. (Pop) Gates for county judge, George Codding for District Attorney or Everett Beeson for sheriff. We have repeatedly pointed out that our endorsement should in no way be interpreted as reflections upon those other candidates who are as strongly opposed to Fehlism and all it involves, as they--and we--are.
    But because of the situation as above presented, and in an effort to prevent what happened at the primary, we have urged and hereby urge again--and for the last time--that all our readers who believe as we do--who oppose Fehl and what he stands for--vote for these three candidates.
    Not for their sake--certainly not for the sake of this newspaper--but FOR THE SAKE OF GOOD GOVERNMENT, for the sake of returning Medford and Jackson County to something approaching unity and sanity once more.
        The Fehl-Wilkins-Zundel triumvirate sneer at the suggestion of unity and harmony. OF COURSE THEY DO. For constant dissension, constant mud slinging, constant agitation is their life blood, and their influence and their cause collapses without it.
    But we know a majority of the people in Jackson County DON'T FEEL that way about it. and we ALSO KNOW that just as the only sure and safe way in the primaries was to unite behind Judge Lamkin--so
    THE ONLY SURE AND SAFE WAY TODAY is to unite behind Gates, Codding and Beeson. For while we admit the same result MIGHT be obtained by backing some other combination--the conditions are so critical, the issues so important to the future welfare of Jackson County, we feel THIS IS NO TIME TO TAKE CHANCES!
    And those who insist on voting otherwise, DO take chances--VERY SERIOUS CHANCES.
    So with that final plea the local campaign is over as far as the Mail Tribune is concerned. (And we are glad of it!) For the reasons above given we urge the people of Jackson County, in their own self-interest, and for the welfare of this valley, to cast their ballots for
    Gates for County Judge.
    Codding for District Attorney.
    Beeson for Sheriff.
Medford Mail Tribune, November 7, 1932, page 1


    The complete unofficial count for Jackson County, for county judge, is as follows:

	Fehl	5,697
	Gates	4,331
	Phipps	2,597
	Pipes	1,100

    Fehl's majority over Gates, his nearest contender, was 1,366.
    Pipes, the Ashland Tidings candidate, carried but one precinct in the county and that was Ashland Boulevard, by a majority of six votes over Gates. In the 13 precincts of Medford, Pipes received but 262 votes.
    Fehl in this city received 2,145 votes, a majority of 25 over Gates, who received 2,120 votes. In the final week of the campaign, a leading local Democrat said this morning, a wing of the local Democracy swung from Phipps to Fehl.
    The Medford precinct vote on county judge was:

	Fehl	2,145
	Gates	2,120
	Phipps	857
	Pipes	262

    The county judge vote for the Ashland precincts was:

	Fehl	644
	Gates	608
	Phipps	451
	Pipes	524

    Fehl carried all the county precincts, with Trail, Wimer, Eagle Point and Rogue River rolling up the biggest pluralities.
    District Attorney George A. Codding, against whom a bitter campaign was waged for months, was re-elected by a majority of 365 votes.
    The unofficial vote is:

	Codding	5,216
	Briggs	4,851
	Wilkins	3,023

    Wilkins carried the following precincts: Eagle Point, Sams Valley, Trail, Rogue River, Derby, Union, Bellview, Wimer and South Jacksonville.
    The vote in this city was:

	Codding	2,145
	Briggs	1,610
	Wilkins	641

    The Ashland precinct vote was:

	Codding	982
	Briggs	841
	Wilkins	391

    Other state and county offices reported as follows:

	Day	7,368
	Porter	5,278
	DeArmond	4,558
	Kelly	5,400

    Kelly won over George Porter by 122, in one of the election surprises.
    For county commissioner, Ralph Billings of Ashland defeated H. T. Pankey of Central Point as follows:

	Billings	6,767
	Pankey	6,336

    In the precincts north of Phoenix, Pankey polled a high vote, but the Ashland district polled 2,104 for Billings to 534 for Pankey, cutting down the early Pankey lead. Billings won by 431 votes.
    The vote on other county offices was:
             County Clerk--

	Carter	8,692
	Ulrich	4,410
	Carter lead	4,262
	Assessor--
	Coleman	8,942
	Heard	3,939
	Coleman's majority	5,003
	Treasurer--
	Walker	10,248
	Autrey	2,662
	Walker's majority	7,588
	School Superintendent--
	Bowman	9,183
	Rogers	3,787
	Bowman's majority	5,296

Medford Mail Tribune, November 10, 1932, page 1


    A subscriber asks us to explain Pop Gates' defeat for county judge. We explained it before it happened.
    The day before the election we said that unless the people united overwhelmingly behind Pop Gates, the strongest candidate opposing Earl Fehl, the latter would be elected county judge.
    They refused to do that. 4331 voted for Gates, 2597 voted for Phipps, 1110 voted for Pipes--a total of 8038. Fehl's total was 5697.
    It is apparent that if Pipes had retired from the race, Fehl would still have had a plurality of 256 votes, approximately his plurality in the primary over Lamkin.
    Under such circumstances, however, if 130 votes that went to Phipps had gone to Gates, the latter would have been elected.
    Why did the voters refuse to go to Pop Gates in sufficient numbers to put him over?
    We have an answer to that, which of course may or may not be correct. In our opinion, it was due to the peculiar hookup during the campaign. Fehl, Phipps and Pipes all worked against Gates--he was the man to beat. This combination was too strong for any one man to overcome, particularly when a defensive instead of an offensive strategy was adopted.
    In other words, Gates was beaten in the election for the same reason that Sheriff Jennings was beaten in the primary. Because he was alone against the field. Jennings had every candidate for sheriff working against him--five Republicans and one Democrat. The Republican candidates didn't want him as an opponent; the Democrat wanted to beat him. The combination was too much for any one man to overcome.
    It is always easy to be wise after the event. But if Gates' supporters had concentrated upon fighting Fehl, kept constantly on the offensive instead of being forced to adopt the defensive--the results MIGHT have been different.
Medford Mail Tribune, November 11, 1932, page 8


To the Editor:
    Thanks for printing your interesting tables of the election results in Jackson County--this is an example of enterprising and efficient service which reflects great credit upon the Mail Tribune and is greatly appreciated by its readers. In studying these tables, however, I admit there is much I can't understand, and I would appreciate an explanation from you. How do you explain the vote for Fehl, for example, and the vote for Sheriff Jennings and George Codding--the voters appear to have been on one side of the issue, where Fehl was concerned; and on precisely the opposite side in the case of his two chief opponents. I know I would be greatly interested in your interpretation of this inconsistency and so would your readers.
                    FRANCES HEFFERNAN,
                        Medford, November 14.
    We admit the inconsistency but have heard no satisfactory explanation and have none to offer.
    Fehl's chief issue was the time-honored cry of gang rule and the breakdown of law and order. Codding and Jennings were the leader of this so-called gang; they were held responsible in the much-advertised Dahack case and other cases for the breakdown of law and order.
    Yet Codding was re-elected by a safe majority, and the written-in vote for Jennings was unquestionably the greatest personal tribute and expression of public confidence in a public officer ever recorded in the history of Jackson County.
    Obviously the people of Jackson County, as a whole, did not believe these charges against these two efficient public servants, did not accept the unwarranted claim of the malcontents that lawlessness reigned rampant in Jackson County. They dismissed all this noise and fury for what it was--merely a lot of hooey to catch political flies.
    Why then did they vote for Fehl and put him in control of county affairs by such an emphatic plurality?
    Well, the only explanation we can conjure up is that the vote for Fehl did not represent an endorsement of his charges or his claims, but DID represent an expression of sympathy for the underdog, for a man who had been deprived of his chief means of livelihood by the awarding of a judgment against him.
    The fact that Mr. Fehl's paper was not discontinued, but resumed publication as before, was lost sight of in this emotional reaction, as were other substantial factors in the situation, which militated against this sympathy plea.
    THAT, we admit, isn't much of an explanation, but it is the only one we can dig up at the present writing. If any of our political wiseacres hereabouts have a more convincing interpretation, we would be glad to publish same. Although it is our belief that the sooner we forget politics, local and national, and the sooner we get together on the successful solution of more immediate and important problems, the better for all concerned.
Medford Mail Tribune, November 15, 1932, page 4


    In the suits of Niedermeyer, Inc., against Earl H. Fehl, the Pacific Record-Herald, Roy M. Parr and the sheriff, a ruling was handed down yesterday by Circuit Judge E. C. LaTourette of Oregon City, holding that Fehl had not sustained any of the allegations made in the action, and upholding the claims of Niedermeyer, Inc. in all particulars.
    The decision gives to Niedermeyer, Inc., possession of the machinery of the Pacific Record-Herald plant, against which an execution of judgment was filed by Parr when awarded $15,000 judgment against Fehl and his paper in a libel suit.
    Fehl, in his countersuit, claimed that he was entitled to approximately $20,000 for services rendered over a period of years, and a commission for the sale of the lot upon which the Holly Theater stands, an architect's commission, contractor's fee, and pay for services in launching the building of the theater. It was an involved action, extending over a number of years, and included a chattel mortgage on the Pacific Record-Herald plant.
    Niedermeyer, Inc., set forth in the suit that they had allowed Fehl $10 per day as foreman of the Holly building construction, and had made deductions and given credit for this and other items on the chattel mortgage.
    Judge LaTourette instructed that a finding in accordance with his ruling be filed by attorney George M. Roberts, counsel for Niedermeyer, Inc.
    The case was heard last June by Judge LaTourette when Fehl filed an affidavit of prejudice against Circuit Judge H. D. Norton.
Medford Mail Tribune, November 18, 1932, page 1


    A decree in the case of Niedermeyer, Inc., against Earl H. Fehl and others for a judgment of $3500 and $350 attorney fees was filed in circuit court late yesterday. The decree was signed by Circuit Judge E. C. LaTourette of Clackamas County, who heard the case.
    The decree directs that a judgment be made against the property involved, that the same be sold and that a deficiency judgment be issued against Fehl if required, and that "any overplus be distributed among the defendants in accordance with their rights."
    The decree further holds that the mortgage held by Niedermeyer, Inc., has priority over the libel judgment of Roy Parr for $15,000 awarded by a jury against Fehl and the Pacific Record-Herald, that no partnership existed between Fehl and the Niedermeyers, and that none of the allegations and claims of Fehl in countersuits was sustained by the evidence.
Medford Mail Tribune, December 2, 1932, page 13


    Sale of the printing plant of the Pacific Record-Herald, under a judgment and order of sale issued out of circuit court, was made yesterday by Sheriff Ralph G. Jennings. The judgment was issued by Circuit Judge E. C. LaTourette of Clackamas County in the suit of Niedermeyer, Inc., against the Pacific Record-Herald and Earl H. Fehl. A decree in favor of Niedermeyer, Inc., was issued a month ago by Judge LaTourette.
    The only bidder was L. Niedermeyer, who bid $1500. The judgment was for $4,004,64. A deficiency judgment for the uncovered balance will be issued. The sale yesterday was on a personal property judgment.
    Notice of the sale was duly posted, attorneys for Niedermeyer, Inc., said, for "ten days in three public places as required and every process of law duly observed." Sheriff Jennings, who conducted the sale, said this morning that the legal action "came up in the regular order of business, had no secrecy," and "Mr. Fehl knew the day and date, and was advised by phone a short time before the hour set."
    A second execution of judgment in the Niedermeyer, Inc., decree against the Pacific Record-Herald and Fehl for the sum of $3500 against the building and land is scheduled for January 7, 1933, at 10 o'clock on the courthouse steps, the records in the case show.
    The office of attorney George M. Roberts, counsel for Niedermeyer, Inc., say publication and posting of the notice of this sale had been started and that this is the routine in all similar cases.
    The original Niedermeyer, Inc., suit was filed last summer for the collection of a chattel mortgage and other obligations involving the Pacific Record-Herald and other property on Sixth Street. The claims of Niedermeyer, Inc., took precedence over the execution of judgment levied against the paper in the $15,000 Parr libel suit verdict. Fehl filed a counterclaim against Niedermeyer, Inc., for $21,000. The case was heard before Circuit Judge LaTourette of Oregon City when an affidavit of prejudice was filed against Judge Norton. The decree and findings, upholding Niedermeyer, Inc., claims, and holding that Fehl had failed to support his counterclaim, was handed down last month.
    The Niedermeyer, Inc., action bears no relationship to the Dahack still slaying case, the Parr libel suit, or any other Jackson County case, with which it has been erroneously linked, attorneys and county officials said today.
Medford Mail Tribune, December 15, 1932, page 10


    Earl H. Fehl, County Judge-elect, who assumes office next Tuesday, yesterday issued a ukase containing 16 articles, covering all phases of county government, and calling for a general reorganization, establishment of a new bureau for county relief, and an audit of the books of the county. No county funds are provided for in the budget for either, it is said.
    One of the outstanding proposals is for control of county funds as follows:
    "That all county funds now on deposit in Jackson County be made available and placed under control and direction of the county court for such re-deposit as may appear necessary."
    The plan conflicts with the state law which, it is pointed out, places the treasurer under heavy bonds, requires that county money be kept in a duly authorized bank, and makes the treasurer the sole custodian and responsible for county funds.
    The platform of County Judge-elect Fehl follows the recommendations of the recent grand jury, with the exception of that body's suggestion that the county judge and county commissioners be placed under bond. The county court at present under Oregon law is under no bonds.
    The program, as advanced by County Judge-elect Fehl, also provides for divorce of the county health unit and county relief work from associate organizations, an inventory of all county machinery, and suspension of work until it is completed, the refund of marriage fees to the general fund, change in the system of furnishing meals to county jail prisoners, control of tax title sales, competitive bids for county supplies, discontinuance of use of county autos save for county business, mileage fees save when fixed by law, suspension of the county engineer's office until services appear necessary, no appointment of a county agent until an investigation can be made into the needs of this department of county services, and the supervision of the county court of patients in the county poor farm and sanitariums.
    County Judge-elect Fehl asks that his program be made a part of the minutes of the first meeting of the newly created county court. In explanation of the statement of policies, the following concluding statement is made:
    "The ultimate purpose of the foregoing reorganization of the county affairs is to reduce operating expenses of the county government so as to relieve the tension on the taxpayers and to give the taxpayers a sound economic business administration, and with a firm resolve, God being my helper, I pledge unto the people of Jackson County, if aided by them and by my colleagues, to make good every pledge I have made to my constituents."
Medford Mail Tribune, December 30, 1932, page 4


    Warrants for arrest have been served on the following residents of Jackson County in the political turmoil:
    In connection with the ballot theft--
    County Judge Earl H. Fehl;
    County Sheriff Gordon L. Schermerhorn;
    T. L. Brecheen, organizer of the Good Government Congress;
    John Glenn, county jailer;
    C. W. Davis, county machinist;
    Walter J. Jones, mayor of Rogue River, and recently appointed district road supervisor by Judge Fehl;
    Arthur LaDieu, ex-advertising manager of the Medford Daily News.
    C. W. McKittrick, alleged leader of the Green Springs mountain boys, reputed body guard of L. A. Banks, former editor of the News, and also for LaDieu;
    Virgil Edington and J. Croft.
    County officers are holding warrants for six others in connection with the robbery.
    Four are charged with horsewhipping editor Leonard N. Hall of the Jacksonville Miner.
    They are--
    Henrietta B. Martin, president of the Good Government Congress, who wielded the whip;
    Her father, C. H. Brown, secretary of the congress;
    L. O. Van Wegen and L. E. Fitch.
    Saturday, February 25, was a red-letter day for developments in the political turmoil prevalent in Jackson County for several months, and brought to a head by the theft of sheriff-recount ballots Monday of last week.
    It saw the arrest of County Sheriff Gordon L. Schermerhorn for the ballot theft; the reopening of the much-publicized Dahack case; the dispossession of L. A. Banks, fiery editor of the Medford Daily News, of his plant; and the horsewhipping of editor Leonard N. Hall by Henrietta B. Martin, president of the Good Government Congress.
    Close on the heels of these events followed the arrest of County Judge Earl H. Fehl in the ballot theft, along with other county employees, and several members of the Good Government Congress, whose names are listed above.
    Thursday morning papers  confirmed the rumor that Virgil Edington of Gold Hill is one of the youths involved. He has been employed by L. A. Banks as a paper carrier, and later is alleged to have done bodyguard duty for him and J. A. LaDieu.
    Mrs. Martin and others held in the horsewhipping matter were arraigned for hearing before Justice W. R. Coleman Wednesday afternoon. Trial was set for Friday morning at 10 a. m.
    Latest developments in the ballot theft was the issuance of writs of habeas corpus for five of those arrested, namely, C. W. Davis, T. L. Brecheen, Virgil Edington, J. Croft and C. W. McKittrick.
    Judge Fehl issued the writs for the first four and the question has arisen if he has authority to hear the case, being himself a defendant in the matter. Also two of the prisoners, Davis and Brecheen, are held in the Josephine County jail, and there is doubt as to the power of the county judge over the sheriff of another county.
    The writs of habeas corpus demand the appearance of the prisoners at a given time to show cause of their detention.
    The reopening of the Dahack case came as somewhat of a surprise move, but is being made in the hope that another phase of the unrest in the county may be cleared up. Officer Joe Cave is held charged with involuntary manslaughter in connection with the death of Everett Dahack, allegedly killed by a bullet from Cave's gun fired during a raid on a Reese Creek still November 14, 1930. The matter has been investigated by two other grand juries, but the hesitancy of three men held for operating the still to testify prevented a true bill being returned. They have since served their sentences and last week were willing to talk.
    Cave's indictment charges "that said Joe Cave in the commission of a lawful act, but without due caution or circumspection, fired a rifle in the proximity of Everett Dahack, causing his death."
Gold Hill News, March 2, 1933, page 1


To the Editor:
    In the Pacific Record Herald appears a letter from C. H. Brown regarding money taken from the Farmers and Fruitgrowers Bank after the moratorium was declared.
    Our firm received that money--small silver change--to enable us to do business. For that change, we paid the bank its equivalent in other money of larger denomination. This courtesy was not denied by any of the banks.
    No money was taken from the bank--the moratorium was not violated.
    This should serve in show just how much foundation there is for the nauseous vaporings of the filthy minds that have been casting suspicions on the citizens of Jackson County.
Medford Mail Tribune, March 5, 1933, page 1


    Is E. H. Fehl judge of Jackson County, or head of the so-called Good Government Congress, or is he both?
    In the last issue of his paper, he issues an official proclamation worded in part as follows:
    "Therefore, as judge of Jackson County I am appealing to each and everyone who is now a member of the Good Government Congress, to at once call at the office of the Good Government Congress located in the Herald Building, at 324 West Sixth Street, in the city of Medford, and leave with the lady in charge whatever sum of money that you can spare in the interest of the re-establishment of a free press in Jackson County."
    Here is a county judge, acting in his official capacity, turning his private office into the headquarters of a political organization, whose leaders have openly appealed to taking the field in open revolution against the people of this state, and asking for cash contributions to maintain a private business in which he is himself interested.
    Do the people of Jackson County endorse THAT SORT OF THING! Do they want their judge acting as the leader of such an organization, using the power of his office to get money from the people of this community to finance a blackmailing sheet dedicated to the destruction of everything that the law-abiding and self-respecting people of this community hold dear?
    The banks are closed. Every spare dime is needed to provide food for the hungry, and shelter for the ill and distressed.
    And yet the county judge of Jackson County, elected to look after ALL the people of this county--at a critical time like this--makes his own office the headquarters of an organization whose members cry out for ropes and nooses, whose leader calls for revolution; demands they hand over their hard-earned nickels and dimes to finance private business in which he is interested, and which had done more to ruin this county than any other agency in its entire history.
    Once more this paper calls on County Judge Fehl to resign, before he violates every principle of decency, drags into the mud and the mire every consideration of honor and self-respect in public office.
    It must be clear NOW to every right-thinking citizen that as long as he remains in office nothing can be done--no constructive work is possible--no genuine relief attainable.
    We asked that he resign before, in justice to himself, as a suspected accomplice in one of the most outrageous crimes against good government and law and order in the history of this community.
    We ask it now, in justice to the people he was elected to represent and the welfare of the community in which he resides.
Medford Mail Tribune, March 10, 1933, page 8


    The district attorney's office this afternoon said it had an unconfirmed report that County Judge Earl H. Fehl was held in the county jail at Grants Pass. The district attorney's office said it has been unable to confirm the report up to three o'clock.
    Fehl is alleged to have been arrested at Grants Pass, where he went by auto with his wife for a conference with Thomas L. Brecheen and C. W. Davis, held there for ballot destruction complicity.
    State police and other authorities had no comment to make on the report that Fehl was a fugitive, but admitted a search was underway but "we have been unable to locate him."
    Fehl could not be located in this city today, and did not make an appearance at the courthouse.
     While rumors were prevalent throughout the city this afternoon that County Judge E. H. Fehl, honorary member of the Good Government Congress, closely associated throughout the political turmoil here with L. A. Banks, had been placed in jail, no verification for the statement could be obtained from officials. Fehl could not be located at his home nor at the county court house.
    In a telephone interview with a woman who stated that she was Mrs. Fehl's mother, it was learned that Fehl and his wife had left home at an early hour this morning and had not returned. The woman stated that she did not know where they were going nor when they would return.
    The secretary to the county court said that Fehl had not been in his office at any time this morning. Various officials interviewed at the court house stated that they had not seen him at any time today.
    State police were looking for Fehl, they admitted this afternoon, on a warrant issued following the return of a secret indictment by the grand jury yesterday afternoon relative to the theft of ballots from the county court house vaults.
    Fehl was arrested by officials shortly after the ballot theft on a charge of burglary not in a dwelling and released on bail of $5000.
    The substance of the indictment, said to obtain 21 names, returned by the grand jury last night has not been revealed. Officers stated this afternoon that Fehl apparently knew he was wanted today by officials.
Medford Mail Tribune, March 16, 1933, page 1


    Failure of attorneys T. J. Enright and H. V. Schmalz, counsel for E. H. Fehl, to return from a conference with L. A. Banks in his cell in the Josephine County jail this afternoon, delayed the hearing before Judge Duncan for a reduction of bail for the county judge. The hearing will be held as soon as the attorneys return.
    Fehl was still eluding the authorities.
    Earl H. Fehl, county judge of Jackson County, under indictment as one of the 23 men who burned and destroyed 10,000 official ballots on the eve of a recount for sheriff, continued this morning in the background, while his attorneys--H. V. Schmalz of Burns, and T. J. Enright--sought a reduction of bonds from $15,000 cash to $7500.
    Fehl was not at the court house today and he could not be located this morning. Search was made for him yesterday and last night. Through his counsel he has offered to furnish $7500 bonds, with Ted Heimroth and Ed Vogel as bondsmen.
    Justice of the Peace Coleman yesterday refused to approve the bond except upon the personal appearance of Fehl. Authorities said that Fehl was trying to evade a personal appearance in court.
    The state will insist that the bond of $15,000 cash be retained and that the situation justifies this amount.
    Counsel for Fehl hold that the bond is excessive; that "it in an inhibition of the Constitution," and that Fehl's "official, social, political position" insures his remaining here.
    Fehl was reported as in seclusion at the home of friends.
Medford Mail Tribune, March 17, 1933, page 1


    County Judge Fehl is working night and day to return Jackson County to that condition of internal strife and turmoil which resulted in the theft of the ballot boxes and the cold-blooded murder of Constable George Prescott.
    By the continued circulation of falsehoods and the dissemination of contemptible and incendiary insinuations, while his followers attempt to revive the defunct good government congress, the county judge apparently hopes to arouse so much feeling that another local crisis threatening violence and bloodshed will be precipitated.
    In this effort he is doomed to disappointment. The people of Jackson County have had all the revolutions and uprisings they want--they are in no mood to be patient with those who are trying to afflict this community with a SECOND "reign of terror." County Judge Fehl has apparently learned nothing from the recent unfortunate experiences in Jackson County--but the citizens of Jackson County HAVE--and they are not to be caught napping a SECOND time.
    With the pear crop finally financed, and with local business conditions starting to improve, they want a truce to internal politics and all that it implies. With the trial of L. A. Banks soon to start in another county, and with the ballot cases coming up for trial immediately after, they are quite content to let the political issues involved be settled in the proper way--by the courts--and nowhere else.
    Meanwhile they welcome this breathing spell, to forget local dissension and strife, to concentrate upon a program of constructive and beneficial development for the material benefit of this community and every other community in Southern Oregon.
    Medford and Jackson County have had enough unfavorable advertising for quite some time--all local business has been paralyzed and disrupted long enough--by an irresponsible crowd of self-interested agitators and trouble makers.
    With the stealing of the ballots and the slaying of George Prescott this deplorable phase of Jackson County history ENDED, and if County Judge Fehl can't see it, then the people of Southern Oregon will have to let subsequent events pull the scales from his eyes.
    The war is over. The play is played out. Let the county judge rave and rant as he will, the people of this community are no longer interested in what he says or does.
    They are interested in the Banks trial. They ARE interested in the ballot theft trials. To these trials they will be looking for the facts and figures concerning the recent "unpleasantness," and from these trials they are going to draw their OWN conclusions as to what has actually happened in Medford and Jackson County the past year and more, and what HASN'T--who are and who are not responsible for the same.
    Meanwhile there is work to do, and the people intend to do it. After the trials are OVER--all the facts are known, and the mess cleared up--will be time enough to consider purely political issues once more, and Judge Fehl's status concerning them.
    Until that time, Judge Fehl's desire to engage in a continual political controversy will not be gratified, as far as this paper is concerned.
Medford Mail Tribune, April 25, 1933, page 4


    EUGENE, May 4.--E. A. Fleming, 67, well-known Jacksonville orchardist, at the home of L. A. Banks at the time Banks fired the shot that slew Constable George J. Prescott, on March 16 last, and Sergeant-Detective James O'Brien, companion of the slain official on his last tragic official mission, gave sensational testimony Thursday at the trial of the former editor and orchardist and his wife, Edith Robertine Banks, charged with first degree murder.
    Fleming enlivened the somber proceedings with his laconic replies to questions. O'Brien identified the death weapon--a high-power big game rifle--and the blood-stained bench warrants, and a note Mrs. Banks sent to officers, by Tommy Williams. Fleming told of threats made by Banks a few minutes before the slaying. O'Brien told of looking through a window and seeing Banks calmly reloading his rifle after Prescott had fallen, mortally stricken, on the front porch of the Banks home. He identified also four fragments of bullets removed at an autopsy in his presence, from the body of the slain official.
    Both were two of the major witnesses for the state, and links in vital corroborative evidence to come.
    Fleming testified that he came to Banks' home on the morning of the murder, in the auto of Earl Bryant, one of the eight men who have entered pleas of guilty to ballot theft. Fleming came to confer about calling a meeting of the "Good Government Congress," to collect funds for the defense of the men arrested on the charge. Banks and Fleming exchanged greetings. Mrs. Banks was present, Fleming testified. The two men seated themselves. Mrs. Banks was busy nearby.
    Soon thereafter Banks said:
    "Fehl and Coleman held a long conference yesterday. They planned a political swap, and will make me the 'goat' in this ballot business. They can't do it. I understand there is a warrant out for my arrest. If any officers try to arrest me, I will go out over their dead bodies, feet first."
    "I said: 'O, Mr. Banks, don't do that. It will cause you a lot of trouble.' "
    According to Fleming's testimony, Banks replied:
    "I am going to do it. I said I was going to, and I will."
    Fleming swore that Banks told him he had dictated two letters that morning, warning the officers not to come, and that when a rap came at the door, Mrs. Banks started to answer, and Banks said to him:
    "You better go." Fleming testified he made ready to obey.
    Janet Clements Guches, former secretary of Banks, and her husband were in the Banks home when Fleming arrived, and they left with the words:
    "We are going to the farm."
    Banks told his wife to "deliver the letters I dictated," when she told him "The officers are coming."
    Fleming, his overcoat on his arm, went towards the back door, as the officers came to the front door. Half the distance, he heard a shot. Then he heard a woman's voice he would not positively identify as that of Mrs. Banks say:
    "We have shot Prescott."
    Fleming testified he left by the back door, and was arrested by state police and held ever since as a material witness.
    Under cross-examination by attorney Lonergan, Fleming made rapid sallies, calling the defense chief "Brother."
    The crowded courtroom laughed when Fleming identified himself as "John Doe No. 1" named in the ballot theft indictments. Banks laughed heartily at the reply, but Mrs. Banks retained her solemn, meditative attitude.
    Telling of his exit from the Banks residence, Fleming added:
    "Yes, I thought it was the longest house I ever saw." This brought another smile from Banks, who was in a far more cheerful mood than on the previous day.
    Fleming was on the stand two hours--at the start of the morning and the opening of the afternoon session.
    Under cross-examination by the defense, Fleming vigorously denied that he had told defense attorney Tom Enright and Arthur LaDieu, during a visit to the Josephine County jail, he had not seen Mrs. Banks in the house the morning of the killing. The state brought out to the jury that LaDieu was a former Banks aide, on redirect examination.
    The detention of Fleming in jail since the murder, as a material witness, was stressed by attorney Lonergan. Fleming denied he had been promised immunity, and resented, his replies indicated, his detention. The defense counsel's inferences that Fleming was illegally detained brought no immediate contradiction from the state.
    Sergeant O'Brien of the state police described the actual killing, said that with Constable Prescott he had gone to the Banks home to serve a bench warrant for ballot theft on Banks. He testified the entire proceedings took "less than a minute."
    O'Brien stated:
    "As Mrs. Banks opened the door, I heard Mr. Prescott say: 'I have a warrant for your husband's arrest.' I was looking through a window, in the door, and I saw Mr. Banks with a rifle leveled to his shoulder. I said to Mr. Prescott, at the same time trying to pull him away, 'Look out!' Then came the explosion. The bullet hit the constable in the hand. The flesh splattered in my face, and splinters flew from where the bullet struck the door, and hit me in the eye. Mr. Prescott started to fall, as I grabbed him. We both lost our balance, as we fell to the porch. As I lay there, I looked through another window, and saw Mr. Banks calmly reloading the rifle. I went for reinforcements. The entire proceedings did not take more than six or seven seconds."
    O'Brien also said he saw Fleming running to the rear of the home.
    O'Brien then told of informing the state police headquarters, and the arrest of Banks. The court ordered reference to the proposed use of poison gas stricken.
    The state police sergeant identified the bloody bench warrant issued for the arrest of Banks, after it had been further identified by County Clerk Carter, recalled to the stand for the purpose. The ghastly relic of the murder was then read and passed to the jury. He also identified the firearms found in Banks' home after the murder.
    Under cross-examination by attorney Lonergan, Sergeant O'Brien was subjected to a mildly sarcastic grilling. The defense counsel questioned him about the number of the state police in Medford on the day of the murder, and if Greyhound stages, for whom he formerly worked, were not "owned by the Southern Pacific." He questioned him pointedly relative to his experience as an investigator, and by what authority the state police had to assist in the serving of bench warrants. The defense has given hints it would attack the legality of the ballot theft indictment against Banks, and the bench warrant for his arrest. Sergeant O'Brien was still  under cross-examination at the close of the Thursday session.
    The defense objected to the introduction of the bench warrants, the death rifle, and revolver and holster, found on a table in the Banks home after the murder. They were overruled by the court. The state did not register an objection the entire day.
    O'Brien pointed out on the floor plan of the Banks house where Mrs. Banks told him her husband stood when he fired the fatal shot, and where he had stood while reloading his weapon.
    Verne Shangle, Medford photographer, was the first witness called [and] identified a score of photographs, showing exterior and interior views of the Banks home. Some were taken within an hour after the murder; others were taken on April 21.
    A large crowd attended the afternoon session, and a number of Medford people were in the audience, including a number of university students. The proceedings were devoted chiefly to identification of evidence, and long  cross-examinations. At times there were vivid high points that awakened alike the interest of the spectators and jurors.
Medford Mail Tribune, May 5, 1933, page 1


    County Judge Earl H. Fehl flatly denied the statement made by E. A. Fleming, Jacksonville orchardist and Banks follower, who testified on the witness stand in Eugene yesterday that Banks had said, on the morning before he shot Officer George Prescott, that ''Fehl and Coleman are trying to frame me on the ballot theft, and were closeted two hours yesterday afternoon."
    "It isn't true." Fehl said. "Coleman and I did not plan to frame Banks.
    "I should say I wouldn't frame Banks," Fehl continued. "Coleman and I did not have a conference on the afternoon before Prescott was killed."
    Fehl refused to comment further, except to make a statement about "newspapers printing the truth."
    Judge W. R. Coleman, with whom Banks claimed Fehl conspired to "frame him" on the ballot theft, laughed at the story as "ridiculous."
    "I had a talk with Fehl some time before Banks killed Prescott," Coleman said, "but we didn't mention Banks' name and we didn't mention ballots. Our talk was about other matters entirely, and whoever carried that story to Banks was crazy, if it was ever carried to him. We were in Fehl's private office, however, and I told Fehl at that time that I'd gladly give five dollars, if 99 other friends of his would, to carry his Parr case to the supreme court to determine whether or not he got justice in circuit court here.
    "No," Coleman said, "Fehl and I didn't frame Banks."
Medford Mail Tribune, May 5, 1933, page 1


    With Assistant Attorney General Ralph Moody and Circuit Judge George F. Skipworth presiding for the state, the trials for stealing ballots from the Jackson County courthouse last February 20 will get under way Tuesday of next week. These are the same two men who were in charge of the trial of L. A. Banks, former Medford editor, charged with murder, who is now under life sentence for killing Officer George J. Prescott when he went to the Banks home to arrest Banks in the ballot stealing case.
    Twenty-two men, including County Judge Earl H. Fehl and former County Sheriff Gordon L. Schermerhorn, are involved in the ballot stealing, which according to authorities, took place during a meeting of the so-called Good Government Congress.
    They state that it was while L. A. Banks was delivering an address to the congress that he held up his pen with a match in the clip in the sign of a cross, and made a few apparently meaningless remarks, which were greeted with noisy and prolonged applause. This has since been interpreted as a sign to those "in the know" in the audience that the ballot stealing had been started, and the resulting applause was to help hide any noise that the thieves might make.
    The ballots were stolen on the eve of a recount which had been called by defeated Sheriff Jennings, who was a write-in candidate, as there had been considerable misunderstanding about the proper way to write in his name, and because his margin of defeat was very small.
    It is not likely, officials report, that the defendants will ask a change of venue, as all must sign such a petition, and several have already pleaded guilty.
    As soon as the ballot cases are disposed of, the state plans to take up the case of Henrietta B. Martin, president of the so-called "Good Government Congress" and aide to Banks in his agitation moves. She is indicted for riotous and disorderly conduct, as the result of an attack with a buggy whip on Leonard Hall, editor of the Jacksonville Miner, February 17 last. Indicted as aides of Mrs. Martin are L. O. Van Wegen and E. L. Fitch, reputed "congressmen."
    C. H. Brown, secretary of the "Good Government Congress," and father of Mrs. Martin, indicted for "slandering a bank," is also scheduled to be brought to trial as soon as possible.
    Criminal syndicalism charges, growing out of the Banks-stirred turmoil, will be heard after the above matters have been concluded.
    A syndicated letter from Salem the past week contained the information that Governor Julius L. Meier had detailed undercover agents to report to him on conditions in this county. They have been working for a couple of months, unbeknown to the general public, it is reported.
Gold Hill News, June 1, 1933, page 1


    The so-called "Good Government Congress" at Lake Creek Sunday, according to reports received today, was attended by between 200 and 250 people. Fifty autos were parked around Wyants' Grove, where the meeting was held, according to an official count. The attendance was about evenly divided between residents of the Lake Creek district and Central Point, Rogue River, Trail and Wimer sections.
    Henrietta B. Martin, president of the "Congress," presided, and County Judge E. H. Fehl was among the speakers. Fehl talked 15 minutes. He informed a woman reporter for this paper, who inquired about his text, that his speech "was the ordinary bunk."
    A number of well-known workers in the "Good Government Congress" were present at the session, which lacked the venom and fire of previous meetings last winter on the part of the speakers, and enthusiasm on the part of the small crowd. Ariel Burton Pomeroy, Mayor Walter Jones of Rogue River, John Glenn, former county jailer, and attorney Tom Enright of this city were reported among those present. Jones and Glenn are under indictment for ballot theft.
    Reports of the meeting indicated there was some dissension in the ranks of the "Congress."
Medford Mail Tribune, June 5, 1933, page 1


    Attorney A. C. Hough of Grants Pass, counsel for County Judge E. H. Fehl in the ballot theft cases, admitted in court this afternoon, "I have apparently made an error in dictation in my affidavit relating to my conversation with Attorney General Van Winkle. The attorney general was referring to what Judge Fehl told him and not to Assistant Attorney General Levens.
    "If I am in error at any time in this case, I desire to correct it."
    The court replied:
    "I know the attorney-general would not lie, and I know you would not lie. It is a mistake."
    The affidavit purported to claim that the attorney general had told Hough that former Assistant Attorney-General Levens had reported to his superior his belief that Fehl was not involved in the ballot theft, and was being "framed," as Fehl claimed Levens said.
    Ingfried Holm, secretary to the county court, signed an affidavit that Levens was closeted with the county judge on the afternoon of April 27, and that he left between four and five o'clock.
    Imputations contained in an affidavit filed by County Judge Earl H. Fehl, one of the 22 ballot theft defendants, and involving former Assistant Attorney General William S. Levens, who died suddenly on the eve of the Banks murder trial at Eugene, were branded "untrue" in open court this morning by Assistant Attorney General Ralph E. Moody. The affidavit was filed yesterday by Fehl in support of his motion for the right to inspect confessions and interview witnesses in the state's case.
    A. C. Hough of Grants Pass, counsel for Fehl, filed a supporting affidavit, which was also questioned.
    The startling and surprising allegations in the two affidavits are emphatically and sweepingly denied by Attorney General I. H. Van Winkle.
    The accused county official claims in his affidavit that the deceased assistant attorney general told him in the county judge's office in the courthouse, on or about April 27, about five o'clock in the afternoon that Levens said "I have been investigating the ballot theft cases, and that he (Levens) was satisfied that I (Fehl) had taken no part in the ballot thefts, and that I (Fehl) was being 'framed' as he expressed it, and that he would report the matter to his principal, the attorney-general of Oregon..."
    Attorney Hough in a corroborating affidavit asserts that on April 30 last he had a conversation with attorney General I. H. Van Winkle in his office in Salem, in which he recited the "claims of Fehl and the attorney general said:
    "Yes, that is about what Mr. Levens told me," or words to that effect.
    Attorney General Van Winkle, in a telegram embodied in counter-affidavits filed by the state, denies any report from Levens asserting that Fehl was "framed," or that he was in his office on April 30 last, the date on which attorney Hough claims a supporting conversation was held.
    Assistant Attorney General Moody, in an affidavit, declares he was with his former superior "to within an hour of the time of his death," and that he at no time mentioned any conversation with Fehl, or intimated that he believed he (Fehl) was being "framed" and had no part in the ballot thefts
    The telegram of Attorney General Van Winkle, refuting the affidavit of Fehl and attorney Hough, in full, is as follows:
"Ralph E. Moody, Asst. Atty. Genl.
"1st Natl. Bank Bldg., Medford.
    "Referring to statements contained in affidavits of Earl H. Fehl and A. C. Hough in support of motion of defendants to inspect and examine evidence and witnesses in cases relating to thefts of ballots in which Earl H. Fehl and Gordon L. Schermerhorn have been indicted, with others, for the crime of burglary not in a dwelling, which statements you read to me over the telephone, I have to say that Mr. W. S. Levens, assistant attorney general, never reported to me any findings or conclusions to the effect purported to be quoted from him in such statements. Mr. Levens was never in Salem alive subsequent to the date of his alleged interview with Judge Fehl on or about April twenty-seven, and I never saw him subsequent to that date. I did not see or talk to Mr. Hough on May thirty, nineteen hundred thirty-three, and was not in my office on that day, but was out of the city practically all day. I did see and talk to him a day or two later, but did not make any statement to effect purported to be quoted by him in his affidavit. Any statement to him or conversation with Mr. Levens related to Mr. Levens' earlier investigation and was not in any respect to the effect stated in said affidavits or either of them.
    The essential portion of the affidavit signed by Fehl is as follows:
    "That on or about the 27th day of April, 1933, the date being dependent upon my memory, but it being the last day when William Levens was in Medford and preparing to depart therefrom to prosecute L. A. Banks in the trial which began at Eugene on May 1, 1933, the said William Levens came into the office of the county judge in the court house in Medford, Oregon, at about 5 o'clock p.m., and there told me that he had been investigating the evidence in the ballot theft cases in which I am charged as a participant in the indictment above referred to and that he was satisfied that I had taken no part therein and that I was being 'framed' as he expressed it, and that he would so report the matter to his principal, the attorney general of Oregon..."
    The supporting affidavit of attorney Hough, in part, is as follows:
    "On May 30, 1933, I talked with Honorable I. A. Van Winkle, attorney general of Oregon, and stated to him that I had been told by the defendant, Earl H. Fehl, that Honorable William Levens had stated to him, Earl H. Fehl, that he, Levens, believed that the said defendant, Earl H. Fehl, had been 'framed,' and that he, Levens, believed that the defendant, Earl H. Fehl, had taken no part and had not participated in said ballot theft, and the said Honorable I. H. Van Winkie said to me, 'Yes, that is about what Mr. Levens told to me,' or words to that effect."
    The telegram from Attorney General Van Winkle was received by Assistant Attorney General Moody near the close of his argument, resisting the defense plea for the right to inspect confessions and interview witnesses:
    "There are some matters contained in the affidavit of Fehl and attorney Hough that are untrue, and I desire to call the attention of the court to them. I at first thought I would pay no attention to them, but after reflection, decided they should not be allowed to pass unnoticed."
    Attorney Moody then read the telegram from his chief. The court held that it was immaterial to the matter of witness and confession inspection, but he would receive and consider counter-affidavits.
Medford Mail Tribune, June 6, 1933, page 1


    County Judge Earl H. Fehl, one of the defendants charged with ballot theft, was denied the right to interview state witnesses and inspect reputed statements and confessions obtained by the state in a decision handed down this afternoon in circuit court by Judge George F. Skipworth.
    Fehl's motion for the inspection and interviews was overruled.
    A similar motion, introduced in behalf of suspended Sheriff Schermerhorn, was also denied.
    The defense filed the usual exception to the ruling of the court, and the same was allowed.
    The court held, among other points, "that the law gives the defendants no right of inspection simply to pry into the evidence of an opponent."
    The ruling of the court, in part, is as follows:
    "It would be manifest error for the court to make the order demanded by the defendant and would be an absurd abuse of discretion, for such an order would be absolutely contrary to law.
    "It is the duty of the court to see that the defendant is given a fair and impartial trial, and this the court will attempt to do to the utmost of its ability. But to ask the court to make such an order as this is beyond the bounds of reason.
    "I will say that I have given this motion most careful consideration, and in addition thereto I have studied the authorities applicable to the question and I can find no authority which would warrant the court in making the order requiring the state to deliver to the defendant or his attorneys the written statements of confessions or memoranda of the testimony of his witnesses to the defendant. It is not the law. The case in 99th Oregon does not so hold, and it is the duty of the court to administer the law. If this were the rule, it would subvert the administration of the criminal law. Witnesses would be tossed to and fro--they would be harassed first by one side and then by the other side and there would be no regularity whatsoever in the administration of the criminal law, and for this reason the motion is overruled."
    In its written memorandum, which the court read, the court said:
    "Under the authorities, it is an absolute abuse of discretion, if the court has such discretion, to order the state to deliver its evidence to the defendant...
    "It would be as reasonable to compel the defendant to disclose written statements of his witnesses to the state as for the defendant to ask the court to compel the state to disclose the written statements of its witnesses to the defense.
    "The defendant is advised by the indictment of the charge he is compelled to meet. Under the Constitution, he has a right to meet the witnesses face to face and cross-examine them; this right he will have at the trial of the case.
    "…It would be an abuse of discretion to permit the defendant to have possession of the written statements of the state witnesses.
    "It would be a manifest error for the court to make an order as demanded by the defendant, and would be an absurd abuse of discretion, for such an order would he absolutely contrary to law."
    The court held that "in effect the motion was a bill of discovery." It was further held that the affidavits of Fehl and his attorney, A. C. Hough, are "immaterial to a decision in this case…or for a decision in this motion."
    The court cited a number of authorities in support of his findings in a clear, concise and carefully considered summation.
    J. Arthur LaDieu--former newspaper business manager for L. A. Banks, convicted murderer and former local agitator, editor and orchardist--will go on trial tomorrow morning in circuit court before Judge George F. Skipworth, on an indictment charging ballot theft, the first of a score of men facing the same charge.
    The state will call a score of witnesses. Some of this number have admitted participation in the brazen and bungled crime, and some will be well-known local residents who were on the south side of the courthouse on the night of the ballot stealing and watched the "goings-on" unaware of their significance.
    County Clerk George R. Carter and deputy clerks will probably be the first witnesses called by the state to establish by official documents that the ballots existed, that they were stolen and destroyed, and that a recount of the ballots had been ordered by the circuit court in the race for sheriff between suspended Sheriff Gordon L.  Schermerhorn and Ralph G. Jennings, a "write-in" candidate. Schermerhorn, on the face of the official count, was elected by 127 votes. The theft occurred February 20, during and after a meeting of the self-styled "Good Government Congress" in the courthouse and auditorium. The theft and burning of the ballots automatically halted the recount proceedings as ordered.
    LaDieu will be represented by attorney Thomas J. Enright of this city. LaDieu has been a resident of this city for about four years. He formerly lived in Klamath Falls and has kin residing in Oakland, Calif.
    The state of Oregon, which is prosecuting all the cases through the attorney general's office, will be represented by Assistant Attorney General Ralph E. Moody.
    A jury list of 30 names has been ordered to report tomorrow morning. It may be necessary to call special venires before a jury is finally selected.
    The jury list as called follows: Charles T. Nahas, Route 4, Medford; W. L. Holdridge, Talent; Frank W. Houston, Talent; H. H. Perry, Eagle Point; S. S. Davies, Ashland; John Rowden, Applegate; L. F. Belknap, Route 4, Medford; Henry G. Enders, Jr., Ashland; Milroy Charley, Brownsboro; G. F. Putnam, Phoenix; W. R. Allen, Eagle Point; John Cupp, Medford; William Lowden, Route 4, Medford; W. R. Crawford, Route 2, Medford; J. F. Wortman, Phoenix; Mary Hanley, Lake Creek; J. G. Ferrell, Route 4, Medford; Minnie B. Bellinger, Medford; Glenn Saltmarsh, Jacksonville; Horace Green, Medford; R. E. Carley, Route 2, Medford; Ed Gyger, Route 1, Ashland; Alice Waddell, Central Point; E. B. Olds, Route 1, Ashland; Grace D. Lydiard, Ashland; E. J. Brown, Applegate; Mary E. Kleinhammer, Jacksonville, and William C. Hooker, Medford.
    Circuit Judge George F. Skipworth of Lane County, who presided at the Banks murder trial, will occupy the bench. He is known as an able jurist, strict courtroom disciplinarian, and a stickler for starting court on the dot of the appointed hour.
    Attendance at the trial will be limited to the seating capacity of the courtroom. Guards will be maintained at the doors, for observance. A press table will be placed in the court sanctuary.
    Public interest in the trial, while keen, lacks the tenseness of court proceedings last January and February.
    Following the LaDieu trial, the state has announced it desires to try Walter Jones, mayor of Rogue River, to be followed by the trial of John Glenn of Ashland, former county jailer.
Medford Mail Tribune, June 7, 1933, page 1


    The claim of County Judge Earl H. Fehl, charged with a score of others of ballot-theft, that Former Assistant Attorney-General William S. Levens had expressed to him belief in his innocence of the charge, and that he was "being 'framed'--as he expressed it," virtually collapsed Monday afternoon in circuit court when A. C. Hough of Grants Pass, attorney for Fehl, admitted "an error in dictation" and further said, "the attorney general probably told the truth."
    Attorney Hough filed a supporting affidavit to Fehl's affidavit which also charged that Levens, who died on the eve of the Banks murder trial, had told him he intended to report to Attorney General Van Winkle that the accused official was being "'framed'--as he expressed it." Fehl alleged that the purported conversation took place about five o'clock April 27.
    Attorney-General Van Winkle, in a telegram, denied the claim of Fehl, emphatically and in full.
    The affidavits of Fehl and his attorney were filed in support of their motion for the right to inspect confessions and interview state witnesses in the ballot theft case.
    It was held that the affidavits were "immaterial" to the motion. The question, as a result of attorney Hough's statement, and other developments, leaves the issue, Assistant Attorney-General Moody stated in court, "between the word of Fehl and a dead man who is not here to speak for himself."
    State authorities say that the only conversations between the deceased attorney general and Fehl, was at Fehl's request, when he asked for a reduction of his $15,000 bonds.
    The statement of Fehl's attorney, A. C. Hough, as taken from the official report, is as follows:
    Hough: "I wish to say in reply, if the court please, to what counsel--the assistant attorney general had to say--I didn't know until he called my attention to it by reading it that I had made an error in dictation here. I stated to the court in the opening statement that I made that after I had spoken to Attorney General Van Winkle and said to him that I had come there for the purpose of telling him what Judge Fehl had told me, that he said 'Yes, that is about what he told me.' I see that I stated it in dictating it 'Yes, that is what Mr. Levens told me.' He didn't say 'That is what Levens told me,' he said 'Yes, that is about what he (Fehl) told me,' but in making my statement to the attorney general I was talking about what Judge Fehl had told me that Mr. Levens had told him, and that Mr. Levens would carry it to the attorney general--and I thought I had made it plain to the attorney general that I wanted a confirmation of it, and after I made my statement. the attorney general said 'Yes, that is about what he told me'."
    The Court: "'Meaning that is about what Judge Fehl told him."
    Mr. Hough: "I don't know now--I can see now through this thing and where the error lies. The attorney general probably told the truth when he said he never saw Mr. Levens after he left Medford up to the time he died. The attorney general had seen Judge Fehl a few days or two weeks before--about two weeks before, and when he used the word 'he' the attorney general probably was referring to the statement that Judge Fehl had stated to him, and probably that is where I erred."
    The Court: "I think so. As I stated--someone had misunderstood--that no one is trying to lie about it."
    Mr. Hough: "Neither one of us is."
    The Court: "I am satisfied you wouldn't lie, and I am satisfied the attorney general wouldn't. I think it is some error."
    Hough: "I am sure that at some conversation--it doesn't appear in this record--but if I make an error in this matter I hope counsel will immediately rise to it."
    The Court: "He will."
    Hough: "And on the other hand I hope that if I do not, that the attorney general will confess it."
Medford Mail Tribune, June 7, 1933, page 5


    Arthur LaDieu of Medford, Walter Jones of Rogue River, and John Glenn of Ashland are the first of twenty-two men to go on trial for stealing Jackson County ballots last February.
    LaDieu's trial opened in Medford at 9:30 this morning before Judge G. F. Skipworth of Eugene, with attorney Ralph E. Moody prosecuting.
    Separate trials have been granted for LaDieu, County Judge Fehl, former County Sheriff Gordon L. Schermerhorn, Jones and Glenn and former county jailer Joseph Croft.
    Preliminary hearing for LaDieu was held Tuesday morning, and he entered a plea of not guilty. All the defendants in the ballot theft case were in the court room for his arraignment.
    The same day attorneys for Fehl and Schermerhorn filed motions asking permissions to inspect confessions which have been secured by the state from several who are indicted for the ballot thefts.
    This request was officially denied late Wednesday afternoon.
    Attorney Moody has actively resisted this move, contending that "it is unheard of to expect the state to reveal evidence on which the state relies for conviction."
    Another development of the week was the affidavit filed by Judge Fehl, stating that the late Assistant Attorney General William S. Levens had assured him that he (Levens) believed Fehl was being framed. This was backed by an affidavit by Attorney Hough of Grants Pass, defending Fehl, who quoted Attorney General 1. H. Van Winkle as having learned the same from Levens.
    A telegram received from Van Winkle Tuesday, however, stated that he had not seen Levens alive after his purported talk with Judge Fehl, and that Levens had not reported that he had reason to believe Fehl was framed.
Gold Hill News, June 8, 1933, page 1


    A change of venue for Judge Earl H. Fehl, and the four other defendants remaining to be tried in the Jackson County ballot theft cases, was granted Tuesday of this week by Judge Allison Skipworth, who gave as his reason that selecting a jury for the several cases is becoming a battle of wits between opposing attorneys.
    Klamath County has been chosen for the trial, and Judge Skipworth has been appointed by the state to continue as presiding judge.
    Although it was at first thought the change of venue might result in declaring mistrials for the cases already heard, late reports state that it will not affect these, and that the conviction of Arthur LaDieu, Mayor W. J. Jones of Rogue River, and ex-Sheriff Schermerhorn will stand unless reversed, when and if appealed.
    Ex-sheriff  Schermerhorn was convicted of participating in the theft when the jury returned its verdict late Sunday afternoon. This is the third conviction won by the state in four trials.
    The defense has been urging a change of venue for Judge Fehl for some time, arguing that newspapers of the county were prejudicing the minds of the people. Judge Skipworth twice denied the motion on the grounds that equally prejudicial articles had appeared on both sides of the case, Judge Fehl's paper, the Pacific Record-Herald, doing as much damage as other papers of the county.
    The defense has become especially desirous for a trial outside Jackson County, however, since the conviction of Schermerhorn, and finally won out Tuesday.
    Meanwhile, Jackson County has had another problem to solve--that of who shall be sheriff.
    With Sheriff Schermerhorn's six month's suspension up the 8th of July, he hopefully went about securing bonds to reinstate himself in office, in spite of the fact that he was on trial for theft of the ballots. After his conviction he presented his bonds to the county court, but they were refused, and Acting Sheriff Walter J. Olmscheid was duly appointed. County Judge Fehl, however, did not concur with the other two members of the court in this action.
    Now Schermerhorn's attorneys say they will move for a new trial for their client, and in the meantime, the private bonds he has secured have been presented for approval, in the event that he becomes qualified to resume his office.
Gold Hill News, July 20, 1933, page 1


    Alleging that County Judge Earl H. Fehl and Tom L. Brecheen got into the county clerk's office, shortly after the general election last November, and tore off stickers on ballot pouches in order that they might claim the votes had been tampered with, and thus prevent a recount, the state opened its case against Fehl in Klamath County courts Tuesday, confident that it will prove that Fehl was the brains behind the subsequent ballot theft in February.
    The state will seek to prove that Fehl from the very first did not want a recount of the votes, not only because he did not wish Schermerhorn to be ousted as sheriff, but because he feared a change might result in other offices as well.
    Prosecuting Attorney Moody, in his opening address to the jury, stated in part as follows:
    "The evidence will show that to cover up the sticker removal act, Fehl called the attention of members of the grand jury, particularly the foreman, to the missing stickers, and Fehl was in confidential communication with the grand jury foreman, and carried information gained to other persons interested," Moody said.
    "The state will further show that Fehl asked several people if the removal of ballot pouch stickers was sufficient to prevent a recount, and when told it was not, declared some other way will be found, and further said there would be no recount, and that Ralph Jennings will never be sheriff," the prosecution said.
    The state attorney said the state would prove that Fehl opposed the appointment of a night watchman for the courthouse following the robbery; that Fehl had attempted to issue warrants for the arrest of officials actively engaged in ballot theft investigation, and was halted by a court injunction; that Fehl was around the courthouse all evening while the robbery was in progress; that Fehl's associates acted as guards and that Fehl attended a meeting in the county judge's office late in the afternoon of the robbery date, when plans "for getting rid of the ballots" were discussed.
Gold Hill News, July 27, 1933, page 4


    With Judge Earl H. Fehl taking the stand in his own defense Wednesday afternoon as the last witness in his trial for alleged participation in the ballot theft last February, it is expected that the case will go to the jury not later than Friday.
    The state has presented a strong case against the judge to prove their contention that he was the brains back of the theft. Evidence that had not been revealed in the four previous trials has been disclosed, and several surprise witnesses have given startling testimony concerning the judge's activities before and after the robbery.
    The state has hinged its case on evidence which tended to show that Fehl was much opposed to the recount of the general election ballots which was granted the day preceding the robbery; that he took pains to point out the stickers on the ballots had been removed, and that this should automatically prevent a recount. (One witness testified that Fehl and Tom Brecheen had themselves removed the stickers in the hope that this would prevent a recount being granted.)
    Other witnesses brought out that Fehl had been very active about the courthouse the night of the robbery, and that in a speech before the Good Government Congress in the courthouse auditorium he had bitterly denounced the recount, saying, "We won't have a recount. The recount decision was crooked."
    The state also contended that secret meetings were held in Fehl's office repeatedly before and after the theft, that Fehl sought to hamper police investigation of the case, and that he refused to consent to placing a night watch in the courthouse after the theft.
    He is also credited by various witnesses as having approached them, prior to the robbery, propositioning them as to whether they would like to "help steal some ballots." It is further alleged he told the Sexton brothers who did the actual stealing that "I would sure hate to see you boys break into the vault."
    The defense made a broad denial of the state's allegations, but conflicting evidence given by their witnesses, and admissions made under cross-examination by Prosecuting Attorney Moody, resulted in favorable evidence for the state's case, according to dispatches from Klamath Falls Wednesday.
Gold Hill News, August 3, 1933, page 1


    Disposal of the cases arising out of the theft of the general election ballots last winter, and dismissal of several indictments against lesser figures in the crime this week, practically cleared the court docket of these cases.
    County Judge Earl H. Fehl, who was this week succeeded by Earl B. Day of Gold Hill, faces a four-year term in the state penitentiary for his part as the "brains" of the theft. It was brought out in his trial that he and Llewellyn A. Banks, former Medford editor, now convicted of killing Constable Geo. Prescott when he attempted to arrest Banks on a ballot theft indictment, were leaders in the plot.
    Gordon L. Schermerhorn, ex-sheriff, received a 3-year sentence. It was because former Sheriff Ralph G. Jennings, a candidate against Schermerhorn in the fall election, had asked for a recount of the ballots that they were stolen.
    Arthur LaDieu, former business manager of Banks' paper, the Medford Daily News, and one of his right-hand men, is to serve not to exceed four years. He aided in the theft and destruction of the ballots, driving a car to the mouth of Galls Creek near Gold Hill and dumping the ballot pouches into Rogue River.
    W. H. Jones, ex-mayor of Rogue River, who superintended the stealing and gave the signal for entering the vault, received the same term as LaDieu.
    Tom Brecheen of Ashland, a close associate of Fehl who also helped plan the theft, was given 18 months. This leniency was in recognition of the fact that he pleaded guilty and saved the expense of the trial. The court also stated that Brecheen was not an habitual trouble maker, as were some of the other participants
    C. Jean Conner, a young man who had been active in the "Good Government Congress," the organization which spread much of the political unrest, was sentenced to 3 years, but was paroled to attorney Von Schmalz of Burns, a member of the defense counsel throughout the ballot trials. Conner pleaded guilty to help steal the ballots.
    Mason and Wilbur Sexton, two youths who did the actual stealing, entering the vault and passing the pouches out through the window and later helping to destroy them, were sentenced and paroled. Mason's sentence called for not to exceed three years in prison. His younger brother, Wilbur, was given one year. Both were paroled to County Engineer Paul Rynning.
    Wesley McKitrick, known as "captain of the Banks guards," was sentenced to one year. He assisted with the theft and destruction of the ballots.
    R. C. Cummings, employee of ex-Mayor Jones, and Earl Bryant and James D. Gaddy pleaded guilty to minor parts in the theft. They were each given two years and paroled to Colonel E. E. Kelly.
    Virgil Edington of Gold Hill, a former Banks follower, who accompanied LaDieu on his ballot-destroying expedition to the mouth of Galls Creek, was freed and the indictment against him dismissed early in the cases, when he turned state's witness.
    Criminal libel and criminal syndicalism and ballot theft indictments against L. A. Banks were dismissed by the court as were a criminal libel indictment against Leonard Hall, editor of the Jacksonville Miner, and criminal syndicalism indictments against a number of "congressmen."
    The ballot theft indictment held against C. W. Davis was ordered in abeyance pending the result of grand jury action on the death of Joseph B. Johnston after a street fight with Davis last Saturday.
    The district attorney's office refused to dismiss the charges against Henrietta B. Martin, president of the congress, for riotous conduct in the horse-whipping of editor Hall and against her father, C. H. Brown, congress secretary, charged with slandering a bank.
    Otherwise, the political turmoil in Jackson County is practically a thing of the past.
Gold Hill News, August 10, 1933, page 1


    The county audit completed this week has revealed that the sheriff office "mishandled" accounts to the extent that 50¢ cannot be accounted for, and that the clerk's office is short five cents in the three-year period covered by auditor Haines. The check of records covers all offices and funds, and shows that the total amount handled for the three-year period was $5,472,259.38.
    It cost Jackson County $2500 to find out that her officials kept careful records, in spite of repeated rumors to the contrary. Serious allegations had been made by L. A. Banks and former County Judge Earl H. Fehl that the funds of the sheriff and clerk's office were "mishandled," and their hints and veiled accusations gained such strength in the rural districts that the audit was finally ordered to clear up the situation.
    The opening paragraph of the 153-page report reads:
    "I hereby certify that in my opinion, with the exception of minor errors, discrepancies, and omissions reported hereinafter, all monies collected during the three years ending December 31, 1932 for taxes, fines, and bail forfeitures, fees, licenses, amounts due from other incomes have been deposited with the county treasurer in accordance with statutes in effect, and have been disbursed on authorized vouchers, or remain on hand."
    Auditor Haines further stated, "In my opinion, the discrepancies found are no different than those to be found in any other counties, and not as bad as in many."
    Auditor Haines further said the "errors, discrepancies, and omissions" were "clerical errors," such as appear in any business, and could be easily rectified.
    The report contains no sensational or unusual matter, and none of the charges and accusations hurled by Earl H. Fehl and L. A. Banks against the handling of county affairs are supported in the audit. Fehl in "congress" meetings in rural areas frequently voiced serious accusations, and Banks repeated them in his newspaper.
    The report shows that the sheriff's office under Ralph G. Jennings handled $1,444,686.03 during the three years period, and the recorded cash receipts of the office show a 50-cent shortage. Fehl and Banks hinted in their allegations that the sheriff office funds were "mishandled."
    The clerk's office, another point of veiled attack by Banks and Fehl, handled $18,858.39. The audit shows the clerk's accounts were off a nickel during the regime of Delilah Stevens Meyer.
    The audit shows that the county offices handled in 1932 the sum of $1,432.361.07; in 1931 the sum of $1,929,187.98 and in 1930 the sum of $2,110,710.33. The total amount for the three-year period was $5,472,259.38.
Gold Hill News, August 24, 1933, page 1


    MEDFORD, Ore., May 10 (AP)--A straight-thinking newspaperman, who pitted clear editorial persuasion against the forces of political insurrection, directed the campaign which won for his paper the Pulitzer Prize for "the most distinguished and meritorious public service rendered by an American newspaper" in 1933.
    He is Robert W. Ruhl, 54-year-old editor of the Medford Mail Tribune and once a schoolmate of President Roosevelt at Harvard. He helped smash an upheaval in Jackson County which threatened guerrilla warfare in the first six months of 1933.
    Puhl's fight began when Llewellyn A. Banks, 70, an orchardist, developed political ambition and bought a newspaper plant to aid his desires.
    Stirred into a violent temper by what he thought were gross wrongs perpetrated by city and county officials and fellow residents of the Rogue River Valley, Banks organized his "Good Government Congress."
    Through his paper, the Daily News, he harangued the citizens and pleaded for support. "Ropes and nooses" for some county officials were demanded.
    The first bombshell burst when 10,000 general election ballets were stolen from the county courthouse on the eve of a recount on charges of fraud.
    In addition to the ballot theft charge, Banks was the defendant at that time in two criminal libel cases, one criminal syndicalism charge, and 18 or 20 lawsuits. Banks published an extra edition of his paper declaring he would resist arrest.
    "We have now come to that great showdown," his paper asserted, "where blood is likely to be spilled."
    Members of the "Good Government Congress" threatened to "take over Jackson County."
    Banks' prediction of bloodshed materialized on the morning of March 16, 1933. Constable George Prescott of Medford walked up the steps of Banks' residence with a warrant for the man's arrest. A rifle bullet blew off the top of his head.
    "I shot Prescott," Banks shouted as he stepped over the prostrate body. "He was trying to force his way into my house as any burglar would!"
    Banks was sentenced to life imprisonment.
    "Militant journalism," so called, had no place in editor Ruhl's program. He won his case with expressions of calm, deliberate judgment.
Niagara Falls Gazette, May 10, 1934, page 7
Last revised December 18, 2024