The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1894-05-26
SENATOR'S GUILTLESS.
But the Committee Decides That
Buttz Attempted Bribery.
EDWARDS STILL NON -ooMMITTAL.
The Newspaper Men Still Refuse to DI-
sulge the Source of Their Information,
and tho Committee Has Decided Upon
Plan of Action.

Plan of Action.
= WASHINGTON, May 26-The special com
mfttee appointed to investigate the charges
of attempted senatorial bribery on tho
part of Charles w. Buttz yesterday sub
mitted their report to the senate. Buttz is
found by the committee to have made the
attempt ut bribery, despite his denial,
and Senators Hunton and Kyle are. exon
Grated from all blame
The re port of the committee consists of
two printed pages and the testimony
given before the committee seycnty-six
pages. Among other things the report
says
1T appears from the testimony submit
ted that n certain Charles W. Buttz, of
North Dakota, but domiciled in Washing
ton since December last, where he has
been engaged as a lobbyist and claim
agent, did, on or about the lst of April of
this year, at the house Of Senator Hunton,
in Warrenton, Va, during the absence of
the senator, say to his son, Eppa llunton,
Jr., that he would pay him contingent
fee of S25, ,1Jo If he would, by presenting
arguments rs to the pending tariff bill, in
ducc his father, Senator Hunton, to vote
against it. This offer was declined Mt once
and peremFtorily by Eppa Hunton, Jr,,
by him to his father.
at is also established that Buttz, dur
ing the month Of March last, approached
Senator KYLE. of South Dakota, with prop
osition that Sl5,oo0 would be paid to him
(Scnatpr kylel if he would vote against
the pending tariff bill, The snid Buttz,
when making this proposition. also stated
to Senator Kyle that the money was in
the hands or control of an agent Of Ger
tain bankers and capitalists of New York
city, and that the money was in Washing
ton.
Both senators are shown by the testi-
mony to have communicated the facts to
several senators shortly after the inter
views took place.
There is nd evidence to show the truth
of Mr.. Buttz's statements to Senator Kyle
and 40 Mr.. Eppa lluuton, Jr, that syn
dicate of bankers and capitalists had
raised a sum of money to be USED for the
purpose of defeating the pending tariff
bill or that there was an agent of such a
syndicate in Washington, or that he had
or has any knowledge of the existence of
such syndicate, or that he was the agent
or representative of any one. He further
denies that he had any money himself"
The testimony taken before the com
mittee does not differ from that which was
published at the time the charges were
made and when the testimony was taken.
Both Senator llunton and his son testifietie
as to the offer made by Buttz to the
younger man of money for the vote of the
senator Senator Eyic's testimony as to
Buttz's offer from $50, 600 to $4,000 if he
would vote against the tariff bill is very
explicit, but he testified that afterwards
ButtA said that all he could let him have
was Sl50O0.
The testimony of Buttz as it appears in
print is queer, much like himself and
rambles about in various directions. The
testimony shows that he has number of
alleged grievances, among them being
against Senators Pettigrew and Dolph
because they have been instrumental in
preventing some land legislation appro-
priation bills which he had be en- working
for. Buttz says in his printed evid ence
that he does not see how he could have
made offers of money, because he had
none, nor did he represent any man or
syndicate with money. He thought he
said in answer to one question that he
might have got money somewhere to de-
feat the bill. although he did not know
just which.
Judge Dittenhoefer, attorney for Mr..
Edwards, the author of the published al
legations of corruption in connection with
the tariff bill, appeared before the com
mittee and stated thnt he had advised Mr.,
Edwards not to reveal the authority for
his statements.
The committee overruled Judge Ditten-
hoefer's objections and again called Mr..
Edwards in and repeated its demand that
he give the names requested in the first
instance, and received his fina decision
not to comply with the demand He was
then excused, Mr.. Shriyer, of the New
York Mail aud Express, also declined to
answer questions.
During the afternoon Senator Gallery
and ex-Congressman Ben Lefevre were
before the committee Both witnesses
volunteered their appearance. Their
names had been connected with til G opera
tions of the sugar trust in its supposed ef-
forts to influence legislation by Mr. Ed
wards in his published letter, in which he
asserted that Senator Gallery had drafted
the sugar schedule in committee room
of the Capitol in the presence of Mr.
Havemeyer and others friendly to his in
terests, including Mr.. Lcfevre, while the
finance committee WINS waiting in an
other room. The committee was repre-
scented rs anxiously awaiting the action
of these representatives of the two
branches of the sugar industry the manu-
faeturers and growers, and Mr.. Have
meyer was pictured as standing over the
shoulders of Mr., Gallery while Mr. Gallery
put the sugar amendment in shape for the
committee. Both Senator Gallery and
Mr. Lefevre denied the story
The committee took up the question pre-
sented by the refusal of the newspaper
men to respond to questions, and has de-
cided upon course of action.