Page 12


make the arrests on a random basis. It’s a form of terrorism in a way, but its basically an economic thing,” Read explained. On ‘behalf of the ACLU, Read appeared before the Houston city council last spring to complain about the arrests. One councilman dismissed the police action as a way of “keeping the trash off the streets.” Read also visited the Market Square Association, a group of men with business interests in the night spot area a few blocks from Allen’s Landing. Read says he was told by the manager of the Continental Houston, the only new building in the area, “We’re going to do every thing we can to run young people out of this end of the city. Any time I see young people down there, I’m going to call the police.” Actually, the police don’t have to be urged to make arrests. Youngsters who regularly visit the Allen’s Landing hangouts say that the cause of their troubles are the two policemen who patrol the area: J. B. Haney, not so affectionately known as “Wart Hog,” and his. partner, E. J. Arredondo, “Bean Man.” Most of the kids interviewed by the Observer do not think the Market Square proprietors are behind their arrests. They believe that Wart Hog and Bean Man simply like to “hassle” hippies. The police, of course, keep the area under close surveillance for runaways and drug pushers. Statistics on the number of arrests made and kinds of charges in the area are not available. The majority of arrests, however, seem to be for vagrancy and loitering. Few young people taken in on these charges actually go to court, for many have money in their pockets, a home and family in a respectable suburb or a regular job. But being taken to the police station is, at the least, embarrassing and bothersome, and that seems to be what the forces of law and order have in mind. K.N. The Case Against John White Austin There presently is a pause in the crossfire. which ensued when Texas Republican leaders accused Agriculture Cmsr. John White of soliciting campaign contributions from his employees. The hiatus has occurred while the Travis county grand jury considers the allegations. John M. Stokes, executive director of the Texas GOP, convened a Capitol press conference on Nov. 13 to make the charge. White immediately called his own press conference to deny any wrongdoing. He since has told the Observer he will remain publicly silent on the matter until the grand jury completes its deliberations. Republicans almost timed their allegation to precede, by just a few days, the general elections. A Capitol press conference had been scheduled for Oct. 31, then was called off 15 minutes beforehand. No explanation for the cancellation was given at the time, and no word was circulated about what the subject of the conference was to have been, though Capitol reporters and others understood it was to have involved a “scandal” in a state agency. State Republican Chairman Peter O’Donnell is represented as having been the man who cancelled the press conference, being worried, it is said, that it would only backfire on the campaign for Richard Nixon \(in that conservative Democrats might become resentful of Nixon if Texas Republicans began making charges of corruption against a O’Donnell is said to have thought the charge against White wouldn’t do much good for the statewide GOP candidates. Probably O’Donnell’s primary concern was for the Nixon campaign, however, as the Observer has discussed in previous recent issues. Stokes said later that the Oct. 31 press conference had been cancelled because he and O’Donnell wanted to check their sources “and make sure.” Also, one of a group of four present and former department employees, who, the GOP says, will corroborate Burnett’s story, wanted that the allegations not be made before the elections. Also, Stokes said he didn’t want the matter to “get buried in the other news of the election.” Two weeks later the Republicans were ready with their allegations. Stokes introduced the sworn statement of a former Agriculture Dept. employee, Wardie Lee Burnett, 24, now of Cleburne, who worked two years running a printing machine in the state agency. The substance of Burnett’s contention is stated in the following, taken from a deposition he gave in Cleburne on Oct. 16, the questions being asked by Cliff ‘Gunter, a Ft. Worth attorney. Q. . . Why did you request a travel voucher last May? A. Get the money back I give ’em. Q. What money that you gave ’em? A. For, well, for campaign expenses. Q. In other words, while you were with the Dept. of Agriculture, somebody told you to kick in some money for John White’s campaign. Is that correct? A. $75, right. Q. Who told you to give the money? A. James Triplett \(Burnett’s immediate suBurnett goes on to say he was told to wait six weeks before filing his travel voucher, not filing at once because that would be too near the time the money was allegedly contributed. Burnett says the voucherthe only one he ever filed with the departmentis for $72, three dollars less than his alleged contribution. It showed two trips, as best he could remember, one to Bryan and one to Houston. He says he never travelled on department business while working under White. White at his press conference said that records show that Burnett’s only expense account filed with the department resulted in his being paid $66.60 for round trips from Austin to Ennis and Houston in early February. White said the trips were to pick up some seed tags in Ennis and Addressograph machine ribbons in Houston. He said such trips were not rare in the department. State bookkeepers back up White, saying the March voucher of $66.60 is the only one they can find for Burnett. White denied that travel vouchers are used in any improper way in his department. He noted that two other employees have been suspended recently because they couldn’t substantiate items in travel expenses claimed. The employees were made to reimburse the state for the money they received -for the questioned costs, White said’. B URNETT WAS vague in his deposition as to how he came to under- stand he would be fired if he didn’t make his allegedcontributions. He said he has never seen White and does not know that any money collected from department employees actually went to White for campaign expenses. He was, Burnett said, told the money would go to White for campaign expenses and that the employees would kick in according to the salary they were paid. The question of Burnett’s understanding of the “pressure” to contribute to White’s campaign is raised in these two passages of his deposition: Q. Did you want to give the money? A. No. Q. Did you give the money of your own free will? A. After the pressure was applied, yeah. Q. Do you feel that if you hadn’t contributed the money you would have been fired? A. That was the impression I got, yes. . . . Q. What type of pressure, Wardie? A. Well, didn’t come right out and say it, but, you know, you go out the front door if you don’t come across with the money. Q. In other words, everybody in your department was under the impression that if they didn’t contribute their allotted share they would lose their job in one form or another? A. Yes, sir.. Another question that arises from the Burnett deposition is the timing of his alleged contribution. Burnett says early in his statement his memory is vague on this point but guesses it was in May. Asked later by his interrogator, Gunter, if it was given in May, Burnett answers, “Sometime in May; yes, sir; when all this election stuff came up.” Gunter next asks, “That’s about the time the candidates have to file for election. Is that correct?” Burnett replies yes. But the filing deadline for candidates last spring was Feb. 5. And Burnett’s travel voucher, produced by White at his press conference s Nov. 29, 1968 5