St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-03-22

the questions are. and If the witness refuses
to answer it is for them TO decide whether he
is in contempt.
Mr.. McGhee said the list OF elevators
to whom Mr.. Irons furnished prices is
already in evidence. and Mr.. Irons said
the list previously submitted was cor
rect.
Mr.. Erwin-Do the elevator companies, by
whom you are employed, furnish you with
the number of their elevators?
Mr.. McGee-I will admit that he knows
that. for his salary is based on the number
each has.
Mr.. Erwin kept on threshing out old
straw, and Mr.. MCGEE instructed Mr..
Irons not to answer for the reason that
the whole ground had been gone over,
the witness excused, and the testimony
declared closed.
Mr.. Erwin moved that the witness be
proceeded against for contempt.
The chairman said he had already de-
eided that the committee had gone be-
You'd Its authority, and it had no power
to place the witness in contempt.
Mr.. Moore said the committee had
previously ordered witness under ar
rest, although the question which was
propOunded was purely personal one,
referring to trouble with a young lady.
Chairman GeisSel-He was only in con-
tempt until he consulted with counsel. and il
was dropped.
Mr.. Moore-He answered the question.
Gen Childs-His counsel advised him to
answer under certain restrictions
The Rupley Matter.
Mr.. Erwin suggested that Mr.. Ripley
be called on for his screening books Of
the Duluth elevator system, and if he
again refused to produce them, as he
did the old committee, to place him in
contempt.
Mr.. Irons was excused by Chairman
GeiSsel, and, accompanied by his at
torney, Mr.. McGhee, left the room.
Mr.. Erwin continued with the Ripley
matter and said the only way in which
the screening accounts could be reached
was through Rupley's books, and there
was suspicion in the refusal
Mr.. Geissel said Mr.. Ripley had been
present before this committee. and if
he wasn't called to the stand that wasn't
his fault, and he couldn't be placed in
contempt. Ii he had been called. and
had then refused to present the books
he could have been declared in con-
tempt.
Mr.. Erwin wanted to know if there
wasn't money enough left to subpoena
him now.
Mr.. Geissel said there was some
money left, but it would require con-
siderable sum to carry the committee
through its consideration of the evil
dence.
The Ripley matter was unceremOni-
ously dropped, and Mr.. Erwin took up
the matter of submitting analysis of the
testimony. He could not read through
1000 pages of evidence and submit
an analysis in the brief time allotted.
lie had not yet received all of the testi-
mUny, and it would take him ten days
after he received it to make fair analy-
sis. He didn't care so very much about
it, anyhow, as he should submit an ex-
haustivc report to the Grain Growers
association. Later, however. lie admit
ted that he should like to submit an
analysis to this committee.
Attention was called to the under
standing that at the conclusion of the
last session of the committee 1t was un-
derstoOd that tine attorneys should make
up their arguments before the commit
tee reassembled. This session was not
expected to be one for the Introduction
of as much testimony as had been pre-
sented.