St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1894-05-30
DID SENATORS GET SUGAR?
THE SENA TORIAL INQUIRY ASSUMES, A
SENSATIONAL PHiSE. u4a
GRAY MEANS BUSINESS.
G. 4
=" - q.
A Warrant Will Likely BE Issued
for tho Arrest OF Newspaper
Correspondents Who Refuse.
to Divulge the Names of Their
lnformants - imprisonment,

/ Correspondents Who Refuse
to Divulge the Names of Their
lnfOrmants - imprisonment,
WASHINGTON. May 90. Senator
Gray. chairman of the select committee
to investigate the alleged operations Of
the sugar trust In connection with the
tariff legislation, today submitted to the
senate a partial report of the proceed
ingsi of that committee bearing upon.
the refusal of the newspaper core.
s%pondents, Edwards, Shriver and Walk
er, to answer questions propounded by
members of the committee.
The report. after reciting the resoiu-
ton by which the committee was au.
thorized to sit, states that Ed. Edwards,
whose Holland" letter was one of the
melting causes of this investigation. had
refused to reply to questions by the
committee. The chairman read to him
the portion of his letter in which he.
stated that Secretary Carlisle had Sc
cretly visited the Democratic members
OF the finance committees, and had de-
maiiGed that the sugar interest be taken
care of, because the Democratic party
was under obligations to the sugar in
tereSt.
When the part of this paragraph was
reached in which Mr.. Edwards had said
that what Mr.. Carlisle had said was
quoted from Remembrance" Senator
Gray, chairman of the committee, said:
You say from remembrance. Is it
yours:?" to which Mr.. Edwards replied:
partly mine and partly my inform
ants"
The Chairman-You meal to say that
You heard MIR. Carlisle?
Mr.. Edwards-No.
The Chairman-You say what he SAID
is quoted from remembrance?
MI. Edwards-My remembrance of
what my informant said.
The Chairman-Who was your in
formant?
Mr.. Edwards That, 1 suppose, l shall
have to decline to answer. | do it with
the utmost respect t. the committee and
the senate The information was given
W iuC uiuei OUllSdtiDlS VI the
HIGHEST CONFIDENCE,
by the one who entailed that obligation
so that | do not feel at liberty to reyeaI
his name.
After the above detailed proceedings
were had, the witness requested time in
Which to consult counsel, which request
Was granted. The following day, on
five OStb nf Nov E,IworJ, ,,,,oo,,Gj
before the committee, accompanied by
his COUNSEL, when the committee,
through their chairman, propounded to
the Witness the question: <
Nov, Mr.. Edwards. when YOU left
the room yesterday, it was left for the
purpose or consulting your counsel and
making tip your mind after having con-
suited him, whether you would answe
the question that was ~propounded to
you by the committee, which question
was Who gave you the Information
upon which you made the statement
that the secretary of the treasury, MIR.
Carlisle, made a secret visit to the Dem.
ocratic members of The hnance COM
mIttee. some time in February. an d
while there made a certain appeal to
them" The question is now repeated"
| Whereupon the witness. by his coun.
sci, filed his objections to answering
tine question, which have heretofore
been given to the public. The several
objections were Overruled. The repor t
then gives the various question ask ed
OF Mr.. Edwards, and which be declined
to answer. They include the question
about Mr.. Carlisle, also regarding the
informant as to the meeting of senators
In a Washington hotel with representa-
tlves of the sugar trust; also the state
ment that the sugar schedule wa in
the hands of Moore & Schley, brokers,
before being reported to the senate :
IL also as to the statement that the
Sunday before the tariff bill was re.
ported there had been a delegation of
sugar ttrust representatives at the cap
itOl, who dictated thu
SUGAR SCHEDULE.
To cache these questions Edwards
said the same person gave him the in
formation, and declined to give his
name.
The report cites the examination of
John 5. Shriver. another Washington
correspondent, who, on being shown a
copy of a dispatch to his paper on the
18th inst, relating to the particulars of
an alleged conference II night while
the tariff bill was in committee, at the
Arlington. between certain senators
and members of the sugar trust, which
had been overheard by a wire manu-.
facturer occupying an adjoining room,
admitted having sent the dispatch &c
the paper, but refused to give the name
Of his informant, or the manufacturer.
The committee dwelt upon one para
graph from Mr.. Shriver's article. read.
ing as follows: There are a number
of senators who will be glad if this in.
vestigation should fail. simply because
tn EN- they could charge the cor
respondents with circulating scan-
dalous reports, and have another
upon the floor of the sen
ate. But if the newspaper men are
given a chance to tell all they know
some interesting developments will be
made" Mr.. Snrlver would not sa y
more, however. in response to the
committees urging than that he had
received his information in confer.
ence. After this refusal Mr.. Shriver
asked time in which to consult eoun-
sci. Next day he appeared before the
committee and announced that he had
CONSULTED A LAWYER,
and adhered to his decision not to re-
veal. the name of his informant. The
recommendation of the committee is
as follows: -
'ln the opinion of the committee
each of the questions put to each Of
said witnesses was a proper question
and pertinent to the question under III.
qulry before the committee, and was
necessary to make the examination or.
dered by said resolution of the senate,
and tnat each of said resolutions of the
senate, and that each of said witnesses
is in contempt Of the senate and ought
to be dealt with for his misconduct,
and that each of said witnesses by his
various refusals to answer the cues.
tiOnS as herein set forth. has vtofatad