Daily press and Dakotaian. [volume] (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1875-1880, 1876-04-01
GENERAL NEWS.
An Important Whisky Fraud
Yrial Terminated in
tfItcayO.
Conviction of Pahlman and Rush
Two Prominent Distillers.
!. WASHINGTON.
sCIIENck

WASHINGTON.
sCHENCk.-
WASHINGTON, March 3l.-ts,x- 1ni,,-5
lister Schenck's counsel to day laid be- j
!. fore the committee on fore gn affaHs
statement of facts connected With
the Emma mine which had been pre-
pared for the use of the committees J
but before it was known what course
the proceedings would take before
the committee. The statehent gives
the past and present history of the
company.
Mr.. Faulkner asked whether the
statement laid before the committee
onrthe twenty eight inst, by Schenck
contained allegations Of facts upon
his own personal knowledge.
Schenck replied that the daft of
the statement was submitted to him
by his counsel and after several cham
-ges made in it he adopted it. All he
knew Of the testimony before the
committee before he left London was
a paragraph or two in London news
papers when he Immediately an
/lounced his purpose Of coming to
Washington to appear before the
-committcc.---s-y-s
Q4es.ien-lsit-trne, announced
in your statement, that the sale OF the
Emma mine was fair honest aud
straightforward without falsehood
and fraud?
Answer believe it, l but know
nothing but What ! have disclosed, of
my own personaI knowledge.
In answer to question: -sis il
true Of your Of your own knowledge
that james +. Lyon and A. A. John
son are infamous aud unworthy OF be-
lief?" GeneralSchenck said he pro-
i'esea-te produce unable e-prantof-.s
he had stated, he-being satisfied he
could do SO ON the representations
which had been made to him.
Mr.. Schenck was asked whether,
in making the statement preliminary
to lns examination it was his purpose
to break down the testimony Of Lyon
and johnson, the statement having
been published through the associated
press.
Schenck answered that the object
OF the statement was to present the
course of examination that ought to
be pursued, aud that his reply should
be AS broad as the attack
Mr.. Faulkner in,crroyatel Schcnck
as to whether he had heard auy ol
the original stockholders charge
fraud in the sale of the stock.
Schenck SAID he had received nu.
merous letters, but had replied that
the writer's must act for themselves.
The difficulty originated in the acts
of those who subsequently obtained
the management Of the company in.
including McDougall. Schenck said
he had suffered large personal loss
Very possibly Park had exhibited 9
desire to have the name ofthe prime
minister to England figure as direc
tor, but this had-nothing to do with
his (Schenck) entering into the con
tract. He thought he was making
good and permanent investment
He resigned when he considered i
improper Il o remain director. II.
was director only four weeks. II,
neither proclaimed nor concealed hi
connection with the company. II,
would furnish proof that II. A. John
son bore SO Infamous char
actcr that he was unworthy O
4 ssbelicf. He was amaze,
at two things: General state
ments attributing to him fraudulen
connection with the Emma mine tran
sactions and. then amazed at tn
character Of the evidence Of Lyons an
Johnson, mainly on hearsay, whic
seemed to imply the truth Of all tl,a
was alleged. All the mischiefintenc
ed and evil impressions made were
cunningly contrived narratives.
Questions asked by -FauIknt
were furnished by H. a. johnson
Lyons counsel.
Adjourned.
Before the Clymer Committee.