Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-05-24
Mr.. E. ]. Edwards Before the Senate
Bribery Committee.
QUESTIONED As TO CHARGES HE MADE
Some Of the Sources Of information
Not Revealed.
TINES SEs SUGGESTED


the inquiry into the connection of the sugar
trust with the tariff legislation. Mr.. E. ].
Edwards, the author Of the Holland" let
ter in the Philadelphia Press. was before
the committee for severa, hours. He had
arrived from New York last night and re-
ported at the committee room at 1890. half
an hour before the committee was ready
to receive him.
Owing to the fact that the committee
sat behind closed doors. and the additional
fact that after emerging from the COM
mittee room Mr.. Edwards was found un-
willing to discuss the proceedings. it has
been impossible to obtain q detailed ac-
count Of the inquiry.
Sources of Information.
1t is known, however, that Mr. Edwards
presented a written memorandum, giving
some Of the sources Of the Information con-
| tanned In his letter. and stating that he
! could not give his authority in other cases
and why he could not. He declined to
state his authority for the Information con-
tanned in his letter to the effect that Sec
retary Carlisle had appeared before the
tariff subcommittee. consisting OF Senators
Jones, Vest and Mills. before the original
Senate bill was reported. and had insisted
that sugar be given protection because of
the party pledges made previous to election,
| or for the statement that Mr.. Carlisle had
himself revised and written the sugar
schedule.
He stated that he understood that this
schedule, as prepared by Mr.. Carlisle, vas
still in existence. and suggested that If it
were IL could be obtained. He intimated
that II was his opinion that this fact could
be definitely ascertained by summon,ng
| members of the finance committee. lie
said that his authority was such rs TO sat
isfy him of the truth of the statements
| made.
Other statements in his letter. the author
| ity for which Mr.. Edwards declined to give.
! were those that $5O0.OOO was the amount
contributed by the sugar trust to the dem
ocratic campaign fund in 1892. and that a
! member of the firm OF Moore h Schley,
who, he said in his letters, were Senator
Brice's brokers, had been in possession CT
| the latest amendments which had been
agreed upon to the tariff bill before the
| time when Senator Voorhees, still insisted
| on the floor of the Senate that no amend
ments had been agreed to. 1t was his in
| formation. he said, that this firm had a
| representative in Washington who was the
| man to whom the amendments We're hand
ed he could not recall this mans name,
saying that when he came to write his
story he found that his notes had become
| blurred but he suggested that 1t would be
comparatively easy matter for the COM
mittee to establish his Identity.
The Half Million Contribution.
With reference to the contribution Of a
half million dollars to the campaign fund
| in the last presidential election he stated
that he had been given this information
| upon what he considered good authority,
but that 1t would be a breach of faith on
his part to reveal the name Of his author
ity He also stated that it was his infor-
nation that this money had not been con-
tributed directly TO the national committee
but had been given TO other organizations
where IT was understood the money would
be used in ways to result to the benefit of
national camnaign inf
nation positive that the sugar trust, as
such had made the contribution, but that
1t was made by or through individual mem
| bers OF this trust, with the understanding
that in case of democratic success the trust
should be protected against damaging legis-
iatfon. He tnstanced in support of this in
formation statement made by Gov Waller
| of Connecticut before an investigating COM
mittee in that state, I'm which he said that
gentleman had stated that wealthy men of
New York had contributed 100000 toward
democratic success in Connecticut.
Havemeyer and Benedict.
Mr.. Edwards said It was his information
| that half of this amount had been contribu-
| ted by Mr. Haven eyer and that the other
half had been raised by Mr.. L. C. Benedict
| In the case Of Colorado, which he had
stated In his letter had been carried for the
populists by the aid of money thus obtained
| he said that II was a notorious fact that
leading members OF the democratic party in
Colorado had been in consultation with the
| wealthy democrats Of New York prior to
the election Mr.. Edwards said that his first
Information as to the interest of the sugar
| trust In politics had come to him in the
spring of 1892, when it had contributed
$40, 900 to the cause of the ''anti-snappers'
in New York state, but he had thought
comparatively little OF this until he had
| heard OF its far larger donations In the fall
| intimation OF Mr.. Havemeyer's interest In
tariff legislation had been received from an
interview with that gentleman published in
the Brooklyn Eagle. as early as the 25th of
last January, I'm which he had said that the
tariff bill would De looked after when Ii
should reach the Senate. I'VE are not with
out influence in the Senate" Mr.. Have
meyer was represented to have said 1--WE
| said that Harpers Weekly, of which ex-
| Secretary Schurz is editor, had asserted
that the sugar trust was not without friends
| in the cabinet and in Congress- and he said
| that he had obtained his information about
] the reported meeting of Mr.. Havemeyer
with Senators Brice and Smith at the
Arlington Hotel in this city from newspaper
! publications.
The New York World, he said had print
| ed much matter bearing on this point
| which he had utilized. He had been in
1 formed that this conversation, in which
| Mr. Havemeyer had been represented as
| saying to the Senators that If sugar was
| properly cared for the stock would go up
thirty points within a month, had been
4
| adjoining room, but he was not in posses
| sion of the gentleman's name. With refer
ence to the speculation of Senators in the
| stock of the sugar trust he said that ii
was a matter of common report in New
York that four or five Senators had en-
gagged in this speculat ton. but, he said, ow-
] ing to the fact that their dealings came un-
der the c'ass known privileges, puts
| and calls, there was no record kept of
! them, and the fact of their transactions
| would be difficult of proof.
Witnesses Suggested.
He suggested that Messrs. Havemeyer
| John Z. Searles, eX-Congressman lie Fevre
| Cord Meyer, II. L. Terrell and Mr.. Reed,
| whose first name he did not know. be sum-
moned before the committee as men who
would be able to throw light upon the
] operations of the sugar trust
Mr.. Edwards stated that much of his in
| formation was what would be called in a
court of justice hearsay, and that while
he considered 1t reliable, 1t was probably
not just what the committee wanted. How
ever, he was willing to aid the committee
in its work to the fullest extent in his
power consistent with the confidence placed
in him by his authorities in certain in
stances. He also emphasized the fact that
he had charged no personal corruption
against any official, and he said he knew
no facts that would implicate any one In
hof Ua nd hat al hat he hal