St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-06-10


Street, and the Committeeman
Became Indignant.
WASHINGTON. June 9.-Charles Chap
man, OF the New York brokerage firm
of Moore Il Sehleick, was before the
senate investigating committee again
today. He declined yesterday to
answer questions concerning his firms
handling of sugar stock and asked for
time to consult counsel. He saw
Judge Shellbarger. of this city. last
night and obtained written opinion
from him as 10 his legal rights. This
opinion is supposed to have been to the
effect that he could not be compelled
TO answer.
The question whether his firm had
bought and sold sugar stocks for or in
the interest or any senator was put in
various forms. so as to cover every
month since February, but the invari-
able response was
REFUSAL To ANSWER.
The witness then, at the committees
request, read the statute providing for
the punishment Of witnesses who
C4IOuINa ISIiitlC ~ answer uuCStlUllS out
by congressional committees, but after
reading it persisted in his re-
fusal to answer questions. Asked at
this point if he had anything further to
say. he added: Al the session of the
committee yesterday letter was read
from Senator Brice that has caused
HE some embarrassment. 1t was a
surprise, rs had no intimation that
such Il letter would be sent to the COM
mittee. will SO far depart from the
decision | have just announced as
TO testify that since Hon. Calvin S.
Brlce became member of the
senate of tie United States, he has not
bought nor sold through our house, d.
rectly crindirectIy, share of stock of
the American Refining company, OF a
share of stock OF any industrial CON-
pany dealt in OIL the New York stock
sXchange''
Senator Allen then went through the
list of senators lphabeticallv, asking
in each case If the senator named had
speculated, and the witness each time
refused to answer.
WHEN SENATOR ALLEN
had received this reply TO the question
concerning himself, he said to the wit
ness: Il want to state to you, i'll connec-
uon with this question. Mr.. Chapman,
that | am The w. V. Allen whose
name is eisbraced in the preced-
ing question, and l give you full
liberty TO make personal requests of
you to testify before this committee,
If l have had any business transactions
with your firm, Or through your firin.in
the purchase or sale of sugar stocks or
any other stocks during that period, 1
hope yon will waive your privilege, as
you look at it, to that extent"
But Mr.. Chapman persisted in his re-
1uSal to answer the question. as he did
when other members of the committee
made similar requests concerning them
selves
Finally the committee decided to vote
TO require an immediate answer 10 the
requests Of members of the committee,
that the witness should state whether
he knew of any sugar transactions
on their part, and TO grant no
further time for consideration ON the
part OF the witness, but MIR. Chapman
pleaded that he should have until Mon
day to decide upon his course of action.
without pressing the matter the COM
mlttee excused Mr.. Chapman, but
decided to lay his case before the senate
and nave 1t certified to the district at
torney. as was done with Correspond
entS Edwards and Shriver.