The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1876-04-11
THE EMMA MINE.
Ex-5udge McKean's Testimony.

WAsHINNToN, April 10,-When the House
Committee on Foreign Affairs met this morn
ing Gen. Schenck's counsel submitted list of
witnesses for whom subp9nas were desired, in
order that they might testify in support of his
statements. The list included Gen. Baxter,
Mr.. eager and MIR. Selover, and numbered nine
in all. Mr.. Monroe remarked that these to-
gether with six for whom subp9nas had al
ready been issued on application of General
Schenck's counsel, would make fifteen, and II
the other side wanted an equal number, the
granting of the present application would IN
volve the examination of thirty more witnesses.
The committee then went into secret session to
cecide on the application.
The committee at II 80 o'clock opened the
doors and announced that they had agreed to
accede to Mr.. Schenck's request to summon all
the witnesses named by bin.
Judge James B. Mexican, ex-Chief Justice
of the Supreme Court of Utah, was sworn ard
examined by Mr.. Crittenden.
Ex-Judge Mexican testified that shortly after
his arrival in Utah in 1870 suit was brought
in his court by Joseph E. Lyon, who applied
for an Injunction to restrain the Emma 20.
from selling the mine. Mr.. Chttenden read
Lyons statement that he endeaVored to get
Mexican removed because the latter tried
suit in which he was interested personally.
Judge Mexican pronounced this statement ut
terly false. He had never done anything of
the kind. He recalled one case wherein ne
discovered that two hundred feet of certain
lode had been located in his name without his
knowledge and he thereupon Immediately
transferred the case to another judge for trial.
He never had an interest, directly or indirectly,
in the Emma mine or in any other, except to
the extent above indicated, which amounted to
nothing. and none of his associates who are on
the bench had any interest so far as he knew.
When he refused the injunction asked by
Lyon, Park was not interested in the mine, and
after Park bought in he (McKean) granted the
order in favor of Lyon and against Park. He
had never given any decision favoring Park.
Question-Was any attempt ever made to
influence your decision in the Emma mine in
junction case?
Judge Mexican stated that Mr.. Hollister,
and now revenue collector in Utah, informed
him that Lyon had intimated that there was
an interest of one twelfth, valued at 800, 1000,
he would grant the injunction. Both himself
and HOLSTER regarded this with great indigna-
ton, but paid no other attention to it.
Q-What IS Lyons reputation in Utah for
truth and veracity?
Alt is bad, very bad.
Q-Would you believe him under oath?
Al think if Mr.. Lyon believed the truth
would promote his own interests he would
swear to it. If he believed lie would pro-
mote his own interests he would swear to
that. l would not believe him under oath I'M
less myself knew what he said was true, or
unless 1 knew there was other evidence to
compel me to believe.
In response to questions Judge Mexican said
he had no knowledge of any attempts being
made by Park or Stewart at any OF the judi
say these parties bad attempted any impropre-
ty in regard to this mine or other interests in
Utah. Witness testified that he resides in
Salt Lake City and is able to state that the
opinion of practical miners and scientific ex-
perts in Utah is that the Emma mine is still
o11ohl 10 on1f hot sfc foil &c
due to incompetent or dishonest management
or both Witness could not now recall the
name of single expert who said the mine was
not good one. His opinions was partly based
on letter from DR.. f. G. Winslow, a scientific
gentleman of Utah. to Prof Sillmen, in which
the latter's report was pronounced perfectly
warranted by the condition of the mine, and
by the statement of John G. Hall, mining ex-
pert of California.
On the conclusion OF Judge McKean's exam
ination. Mr.. Swami said that all Judge Nc
Kean's testimony concerning Lyon would be
stricken from the special records as the com
mittee had decided last Friday on the motion
of Gen Banks that questions affecting the
credibility of witnesses should not be brought
into this investigation.
Gen. Schenck remarked that he had not beer
informed of the committee coming to any such
determination until Judge McKean's examina
ton had begun. He desired to say that the
testimony of Lyon and the testimony of John
son also were made up of loose statements
which placed him in a disgraceful position, and
he therefore thought it his duty not only to
disprove their statements step by step, but
furthermore to show their general bad charac
ter.
After some remarks by Mr. Faulkner insist
ing that the determination of the committee
was proper and needful, and by Gen. Schenck's
counsel in opposition to this view, it was agreed
by the minority of the committee still present
in the committee room that the subject be held
open for further consideration by the full com
mittee