The Washington times., 1894-08-03
that be had destroyed the one be had at the
time be destroyed the original.

that be had destroyed the one be had at the
time be destroyed the original.
ALLEGED CAMDEN ORDER.
Edward A. Levy, another witness, fur
nished Photographic copy Of the order,
which said: "Buy me 200 s--h--s sugar-ai
S3s{ or less, and 800 s-h-r s31S or less.
March 2, J,N. CAMDEN.
Senator Smith when recalled and the letter
and testimony of Guillandeu was read to
him, faid that the statement was absolutely
false and that he did not know Mr.. Batters-
hall and never had given him an order for
the purchase of sugar
The CHAInNls-Do you recolIect any trans
action IN sugar stock since the meeting OF
Congress?
SENATOR sMIrH-My impression was that !
bought 900 shares Of sugar.
THE CHAIRMAS-When?
SENATOR SMITH-Along last January or the
nrst OF February, as nearly as I can recollect
won't swear positively that / did buy 1000
shares OF sugar, but rather have the impress
sion in my mind that at that time did.
SENATOR DAvIs-Prior TO the time the bill
came to the Senate?
SENATOR SMITH-Prior to the discussion
SEsAToR DAvIs-Not discussion. Prior to
the time the bill came from the House.
SENATOR SMITH-Yes, sir; as understand.
Your question covered from the time Congress
met up to now. l dent want to be positive
about that, because, as say while would
not want to swear to, l have rather an idea
that bought 600 shares Of sugar about that
time in January,
Battershall, and Mr.. Lodge asked il Senator
Smith knew Of any house with which Batter
shall was connec, ed.
SENATOR SMIrH-That I do not know.
made transaction in Newark through man
named Cohen, a brother-in-law of personal
friend Of mine, and do not know what house
he represented. I never had but one.
SENATOR LoDdE-Transaction in what?
MIGHT HAVE BEEN WHISKY.
SENATOR SMITH, think it was whisky.
SENATOR LoDGE-Is it possible to have
transaction with house you do not know,
through its agents or brokers?
SENATOR SMITH-Yes. This man that 7
told you about was great friend of a per-
sonal friend OF mine at home.
Senator Smith added that this friend asked
him to buy something OF him, and he gave
an order for 900 shares. He did not know
whether 1t was sugar or not, but thought it
was whisky. The question as to purchase OF
sugar, which Senator Smith had answered by
saying he had not purchased sugar, was re-
peated to him, and he said he was not SO posi-
tive about that. To the best of his recol-
lection he had not, and he could not say
whether the Newark transaction was whisky
or sugar. He never kept an account Of his
transactions. He had written to find out
whether it was whisky or sugar, and expected
an answer. This testimony was taken We'd
nesday.
Senator Smith appeared again before the
committee yesterday and said that he had
that he had not bought or sold
any sugar certificates during the pending OF
the tariff bill in the Senate.
CAMDEN WOULD NOT SWEAR.
Senator Camden, who was recalled, also
said that the signature on the photograph of
the alleged order resembled his handwriting,
and he would not swear that 1t was not his
though he had no recollection
Of ever having written it, and had not given
such an order. The following examination
was then conducted:
O. Have you dealt In sugar stock since the
beginning OF this session?
A.-Not to my recollection.
Q.-Cannot you recollect whether you have
or have NOT dealt in sugar certificates during
this session?
Al say this: have dealt in stocks OF va
rious kinds, but have not dealt in sugar
stocks.
VI want 10 GET at tne Qegree OF POSITIVE
ness OF your recollection .on that subject
That order, of which a photograph is before
you, purports, If l understand, to carry a
transaction Of about $4,000 in sugar certif-
Gates. Now have you no distinct recollection
as to whether you have or have not engaged
in transaction of that magnitude?
A stock transaction OF that amount
would only require small cash margin. and
when the party was well known, perhaps, no
margin, so that the real money transaction
would not usually be large. / have had other
of more than that magnitude.
but have no recollection and do not believe
that 1 bought or sold any sugar stock in that
lime.
Q.-Do you know a man by the name Of
Al have seen him but would not know
him il l were to see him here now
Odd you ever have any business trans
actions with him?
Al never had any transactions with him
except on one occasion: he suggested that
Chicago wheat would be good purchase,
and think gave him an order for five or
en thousand bushels That is the only trans
iction-the only time l remember to have
.ver spoken to him.
Senator Camden stated finally: s'There is
one thing that can state positively-that
Mr.. Battershall never received any such order
,r any other written order from me-