Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-01-18
ANOTHER GAS HEARING
Emphatic Denial of the National Company
of an Effort to Sell Out
The Name of the Party Wfthheld-
How the Matter Was Made Public
Merits of the Bill Discussed.

The second session Of the hearing on tnx
dollar gas bill was held yesterday after
noon in the room of the District committee
| Of the Senate, in continuation of the pro-
ceedings of Tuesday, when, it will be
membered, charges were made that the
National Gas Company, now seeking a
| charter in Congress, has been trying to sell
| cut to the Washington Gas Light Com
pany. At the Tuesday hearing Mr.. +. p.
| B. Sands, the counsel for the new COM
| pany. demanded that the letters pulporting
| to make such an offer should be produced
at the next session. There was in
| creased attendance yesterday afternoon.
| owing to the interest that the report in
Wednesdays Star had excited.
The Alleged Offer to Sell Out.
| At the beginning of the session. Senator
Hunton handed Mr.. Sands a document
| which, he said, was the offer that had been
| made to the Washington Gas Light Conn.,
pany. Mr.. Sands read this eagerly and
| showed it to Mr.. George c. Cowlam, the
| inventor Of the processes which the Ma
| tional Company proposes to use. AS soon
| as the ether Sena tors had arrived Mr..
| Hunton endeavored to arrange for a diVis-
| ion of the time, and decided to give the
| gas companies half an hour to argue
| Sands insisted upon making a speech to
| the committee vindicating himself from
| charges which, he said, had been practi-
| cally made against his company. He de-
| clared emphatically that the letter shown
| him did not concern his company, or any
| body connected with it, moreover, that II
| did not come from anybody in the COM
pany, or anybody who could by any posi-
| bility control its action. He said that the
| inventor, MIR. Cowlam, was the only one
| who could legitimately make such Propo-
| stion with any prospects CT carrying 1t
| cut and he had not done it No one but
| he could block the wheels of the proposed
| company, for he has the processes that 1t
| proposes to operate solely unoer ms CON
| troll Mr. Sands declared that if such let
| tiers were in circulation amoEg Senators
| purporting to come honestly from the new
| company, they We're part of fraudulent
| conspiracy to hurt the prop osed corpora
| ton He made no personal point Of this
general charge. and no names were men,
| toned in any connection. The name signed
| to thu letter in evidence, which was nor
| read, was carefully suppressed, and Mr..
| Sands appeal to have the letter and Sig
| nature made public was denied
The National Company Meant.
An interesting question arose as to
whether the proposition to sell out referred
| to the National Company. Enough was
! said between the Senators and the attorney
| to indicate clearly that the letter was In
| effect proposition made, by some person
| not mentioned. to the Washington Gas Light
| Company to discontinue the. effort to Sc
| cure the passage of a bill pending to grant
| a charter to the new gas company, not spe-
| officially described, in consideration Of q
certain sum not named. Senator Hunton
| insisted that this proposition, though gen.
eral and rather vague in its precise terms
referred by direct inference to the National
Company. He asked Mr.. Sands IL there
| were any other bill pending than that for
| which he was counsel. Mr.. Sands admitted
l have afh fo q c Ia
The letter appeared to refer, as the bill to
| be dropped, to one introduced by Senator
| Harris, and Mr.. Sands admitted that such
| a bill had been introduced by MI Harris
| for his company, in duplication Of one in
| PRODUCED in the House, although the bill
| which he was specifically urging was in
| no question that the bill alluded to in the
| proposition to sell out was that of the
! National Company.
| Mr.. COwlan's Denial.
| Mr.. Cowlam specifically denied any
knowledge of the matter, or OF the author
| of the letter. whose name. he said. was
unfamiliar to him. He asked that the let
| ter be made public. but this was not
granted.
Mr.. Sands declared that he would follow
up the matter, and intimated that there
might be trouble If he found the man
whose name was signed to the letter. He
asked for copies of the document, but Mr.,
Faulkner suggested that the name and
address should suffice for any lawyer.
Senator Mcmillan at this point reminded
the chairman that the subcommittee was
sitting to hear arguments on the dollar
gas bill, and not to clear up the apparent
! mystery of the blackmail question: Be-
fore he persisted, however. Mr.. Sands
expressed his regret that the matter should
| have been made public.
How the Matter Got Out.
Senator Hunton concurred In this regret
and declared his ignorance Of the means by
which the story of the first hearing reach
ed the public through The Star. Mr..
Sands told him that he understood that
there was a reporter present on Tuesday.
which astounded Mr.. Hunton, and the lat
ter proceeded to make inquiries Of those
present. The Star reporter confessed his
identity and his presence at the former
hearing, at which Senator Hunton said;
Don't you know, sir, that nobody has
any right to report anything tnat happens
before this committee!
Notwithstanding, the reporter continued
his presence at the meeting, as Is Gus
| tomary in the case of all public hearings
on questions of local interest before the
District committees Of both House and
Senate, and there was no demurrer from
the other members of the committee and
Senator Hunton made no further objection
to the presence Of the representative or
The Star.
Merits of the Bill Discussed.
The remainder of the hearing was taken
I'D in a technical discussion Of the merits
of the bill. Representatives Of the Wash
ington and Georgetown gas light companies
declared that the present output OF gas Is
as pure as can be made, and Mr.. Leetch.
for the former company, said that at
recent convention of gas men in this city
1t was the unanimous opinion that tne
washington company. produced the best
and purest gas in the country.
President Tucker Of the Northeast W ASH
inston Citizens Association argued against
Mr. Sands contention that the penalty
section of the bill was not severe enough
He spoke rather in favor of the company
in this particular. and declared that the
purity and penalty provisions OF the piI
would be quite satisfactory to those whom
he represented.