Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1882-04-11
THE PERU.CHILI INVESTIG ALTON.
Mr. Shipherd Further Examined To-
day-SOme Questions He Declined 10

| Mr. Shiphcrd Further Examined To-
day-SOme Questions He Declined to
Answer.
Mr.. Shipheri was early In attendance this morn
Ing. and as soon quorum OF the members OF
the foreign Affairs committee had arrived Repre-
sentative Blount resumed the cross-examination
OF the witness by asking whether the two gentle
| men-to whom he tShpherd) had yesterday allud-
ed-had told him facts within their own knowledge
about the alleged intimacy between Hurlbut and
Suarez, or whether they simply repeated them.
Witness replied that the two gentlemen whose
statements he (Shipherd) had quoted TO the Secre-
tary OF State were gentlemen OF high standing
With whom he had become acquainted In New
"spoke to me OF his knowledge having seen Hurl,
but and SuareZ around town together. and the
other spoke to me about the matter as prominent
cussed at his club" He thought these gentlemen
had returned to Peru.
sHIPHRRD DECLINES TO ANSWER
Witness was asked, "Who was the author OF the
sealed letter sent by you to Mr.. Arizona under
cover to Minister Hurlbut and to be delivered by
him?" and positively refused to answer. He said
that Mr.. Arizona never was agent for the COM
"only SO far as he was anxious and willing TO Co
operate with u.s. tafter slight pausel ITO the ex-
tent that he did cooperate"
Mr Bount continued to quote from the printed
correspondence, and endeavored to extract from
the witness categorical answer TO each question,
reading from the letter sent to MI Arizona through
Minister Hurlbut, but obtained nothing but eva
sive replies Witness declined to express any
opinion on the propriety of Mr.. Hurlbuts deliver
ing such letter as that to Mr.. Arizona. He was
asked, "Was not that letter written by the Vene-
zuelan Minister" but declined to answer.
THE PALPABLE DRIFT OF THE MORNINGS EXAMINATION
was to bring out and define exactly how far the
witness had gone in the direct attempt to infiu-
ence the official action OF an Official of the United
States. Witness was asked il Senator Blair as
counsel was conferred with in relation to the
letter to Hurlbut In which he (Shfpherd)
lender renaered him n. $4,000 OF stock and
to Mr.. Hurlbut offering him $50 coo OF stock. Wit
ness, however, told him about IL sometime after
IT was sent Itwas discussed by all the counsel.
None OF them found fault with 1t on its face,
Dut the remark was frequently mace, .Shipherd,
that letter will bear double construction and 1t
may get you into trouble"
sHIPHERD PUMPED Dry
Mr.. Blount 1ntimated that he had no further
questions to ask, and Mr.. Belmont took up the
cross-examination. His questions followed each
other In rapid succession and very soon developed
the probability that the committee had extracted
from the witness about all the information he pro-
posed to give them.
Mr.. Belmont-The association or the individuals
whom you represented or stll represent seemed TO
give direction, or expected 20 exert an influence
upon the policy OF this government at the time
vsed by Mr.. Boutwell that the Secretary OF State
was authorized 70 act In this matter without re-
curing any advice or authority from the Presi-
Witness declined to enter into the discussion.
DECLINES TO ANSWER.
The witness declined to state the names OF his
clients, and said he did so by advice OF counsel
DECLINES TO GIVE UP THE BLAIR CORRESPONDENCE.
Mr. Belmont-Did you not have correspondence
with Senator Blair, touching the Peruvian COM
pany?
Answer.-I did.
Question.-will you produce It?
Answer.-I have been advised that the purport
of this examination does not compel the disclosure
respondence with Senator Blair purely OF that
character.
Questlon.-wfll you state whether those clients
suffered an injury from the Peruvian government
which entitled them 10 seek redress from the Peru
Wan government, or had they purchased a claim
which they deemed equitable, and FOR the enforce
ment OF which they sought TO obtain the good
offices OF this government?
This question the witness declined to answer,
simply 'yes or "no, and after secret conference
OF the committee was allowed TO answer I'm his
own way, which he did, by sly1ng: ssNy clients
had purchased the title to property; some OF which
they expected 10 find in its deposit, and some OF IL
they understood had been removed under author
lty or the peruvian government They proposed
first TO assert their title, and until justice had
been denied them they could not assert that they
ernment; but not knowing what course the Peru
Wan government might tlke the committee will
Wen see that 1 could not answer the question
either yes or no and do so correctly"
been denied them, had iU?
Witness.I cannot add anything to what have
already said.
Mr.. Belmont simply ask you had justice been
denied them at that time?
THE WITNESS GETS ANGRY.
Witness showed an angry flush upon his face,
but made no answer.
Mr.. Belmont-Then you decline to answer
Witness {angrily.)-I have as many rights here
as the examiner, and have come here prepared to
defend them.
Mr.. Belmont.-You are here as witness, and no
rights to which you are entitled will be denied you
by this committee. You are asked, as other wit
nesSeS will be asked to answer questions touching
matter OF grave importance. The committee
have made no accusation against you.
Mr.. Sh1pherd.-I would wish that the committee
could excuse me for the day.
At I2 :35 the investigation was postponed until
1890 a. IN. tomorrow. The committee then went
into secret session.
Mrs. ScOville and Guiteau.
Mr.. Scoville said to a STAR reporter to-day that
| there was no significance in the action which,
it is reported, Mrs ScovflIe has commenced