The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1876-03-23
THE EMM.i NINE SPINDLE.
Nhnt Ex-senator william NJ. stewart
Knows About IL.


WASHINGTON, March 22.-Ex Senator
Stewart was again before tho Committee Oh
Foreign Affairs to-day In relation to the Emma
rhine. II appeared from his testimony that
after negotiation was made with Albert Grant
for putting the stock ON market 1t was agreed
that Gen. Schenck should have some OF II, no
having said lie had money and would like to in-
vest. lie gave a circunstantial account OF tho
appointment OF directors OF the company, and
said that 1t was not by acquiring any interest
that Gen. Schcnck became n director. The sal
ary wfs S2,5cO, and q II. Schcnck had time TO
attend u the business. Ho had no knowledge
n, TO whether the General paid for tho stock
limseh, but supposed tn Park had arranged
to carry the stock for him.
MIR. Stewart then dwelt on the contract with
Lyon, IN which he was 10 drop hi, litigation for
onc-third Of the proceeds, and es-isn his tights
70 the com pany to make clean title. and then
TO receive the opti.n of one-cishth Of the rro-
ccsds OF the sale Of the minc over Sl,stO,G0 nud
u the proceeds ever that ere less than Sj.O.OO.
Lyon was to take that In fun settlement of his
claim. The commissions or FL glish pulls" as
they called them. demanded by
all bankers. and nearly everybody with
+ .hnestock, Of Jay Cooke X o.. demand
ed ~ per cent. ON the sale. Pulls" were
so paid tn Baron Grant, Lewis S Sons. and
others. Coates llankley. the parties who an
tr9duced them to u ron Grant. demanded
$1,000 for the intr! lunior. but ~ was not paid.
Nr McCulloch. OF Jay Cooke. McCulioch & Co.
did not want his partners to go into II, but
Fshnestock did. lie tstewartl Thought Dlron
Giant PAID Jay Coz ke; McCulloch Co. the -.
per cent. On Sj,OO0c.J demanded by DIR. Fame
sock. lie did NOT think they eerneG the money;
in fact he was surprised at the amount OF money
they hrd to pay tp nUi bers OF people Ia Eng
and. ln ston dil not get nis 10000. though
ne RED n 'id.
IN repy 10 a question why. In a letter to Nr.
Park, he tMr. steward spoke of Lyons claim a.
a formidable one. M. stewart SAID he, IA Lyons
Lttorney. mad lou Int It so hard that ~ was for
mdaDe at one time, hut that when ho lnally
learned the character of his client lie ch.n4ed
they gave Gen. schenck 500 shares Of the stock.
Mr.. Park guaranteeing that they should be
were put down ns cash. lie said that statement
was utterly false. IL WIS also untrue that, as
lNgn stated, tue mine was to be sold for
$l.J0O,OJO, md that he Uyonl was to have
$4,000 lie denied that he had told Lyon
tn It william Lent was paid Sl2 900, and that no
lStewartl and Lent were unfriendly. Lont to!d
/ him IN san Francisco that he received some
snail amount of money, but he had forgotten
how much, aud never lked with Lyon about
| i. lie did not say 10 Hiram \. johnson that,
| knowing the uhcertaintes Of mining nt BEST ho
would not IN MS position a. Senator become a
| director or couple himself with the ssls of any
mine. He had been mining lawyer. owner or
mine director for fifteen years, and said that it
was a common thing IN his country To become
| directors or owners OF mines.
Tho witness devoted himself to day to the en-
! phGtc denial Of many Of the main points Of
! LYONS TESTIMONY, and to show that Gen.
| Srhenck was an owner OF the stock long before
| the organization of the company. and that he
did not become a director until pftcr the sale Of
| the milne. lie sAid that It could not be true that
| Baron Grant went Into the affair mainly ON ths
! the cason that Gen. Schenck did not become a
| director until aftcr the sale OF the mine. llo
10 that gen. Schenck's name was ilrst sug-
rp-ted on the "a or 10 Of November, long after
/ the d OT.aliZeu.