Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-04-19
The Peruvian, Company Inquiry.

1he FeTnct0r company Inquiry.
WASHINGTON, April 1S.-The shipherd ex-
animation was resumed, Representative Deus
ter conducting the investigation.
Witness declined to state whether Peter
chefs heir, OR what was paid for it or wheth-
er it was purchased from the legitimate heir
shipherd was asked if Marvin Green. VIM.
n. Vanderbilt, E. D. Morgan, Mr.. AIedill and
others mentioned in the list which he gave to
Minister Hurlbut were stockholders in the
Peruvian Company, and declined to answer.
He said he had been acquainted with White
law Reid number of years. Witness de-
c]ined to state, whether Senator Blaine,
ex-senator Cragan, and others,
mentioned by him are row stockholders also
to whom he referred when he said the nearest
friends OF the new president are identified with
the company. He refused to tell who are the
directors OF the company at the present time
and from whom he had received assurance of
the strongest government support. Several
ness persistently declined in every instance to
answer any question looking to an enquiry as
to the personnel of the Peruvian company, or
its fuan; ial status.
Witness held a. conversation with Prescott
November 10, at the state department. 1t was
the first time he had ever met him. Walker
Blaine introduced them and introduced the
conversation by saying. "Well, how is the
Peruvian company? What are you going TO do
next?n
The conversation soon drifted into discus
sion of the diplomatic attitude of Chilli. It
was informal, as l might have visited any gen.
tleman, and made but little impression upon
my mind.
Williams then asked the witness: What
was your real object in writing your letter OF
August Q, to Walker Blaine?
Witness replied at some length, assuring
the ommittee that he would with pleasure
answer with frankness, and somewhat sur
prising them with his statement that be look
ed upon Blaine as no lawyer, and seeing in
Walker Blaine bright, clear. headed attorney,
he approached him as lawyer.
By 8 series of questions witness was finally
driven from the position at first assumed that
he approached Walker Blaine to employ his
service as an attorney. He simply sought his
judicial services. He thought the son was bet.
ter acquainted with the worsingsof the fathers
| mind and could better supplement any infor-
| nation that might be impaired by Senator
| Blair. After some further questions which
| failed to elicit other than evasions, Deuster
declined to put any more questions TO the wit
| ness and stated to the chairman his reasons,
| substantially as follows:
For the several weeks during which the
| witness had been before us, he has refused to
answer question calculated TO throw any
| light upon this investigation. He has refused
| to furnish any documt ntary evidence which
might disclose the true purpose and character
of the Peruvian company. He has refused
to inform MS who are the stockholders, who
| are the directors, or what was tbs amount OF
capitol of any investment in the Peruvian
| company, In my opinion no individual
whose interests are such that he
feels warranted in seeking 10
influence diplomatic interference of the gov
| ernment has right to wrap himself and bis
affairs in such profound secrecy. In my opin-
| ion no wrong has been done except by the
president of the Peruvian company in at
! tempting to involve this government in its
diplomatic relations, and in approaching high
officials and minister of the United States
with an attempt to bride them. | therefore
move that we dismiss the witness from further
examination.
Chairman Williams stated that all these
questions would be carefully considered and
passed upon by the committee. Shipherd
asked an opportunity to be heard in regard to
his reasons for declining to answer certain
questions, and was assured that such oppor
tunity would be afforded him.
The committee adjourned with the under
standing that Shepherds attep dance would not
again be required until the latter part of
uext week.