Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-01-06
Real Beginning Of the Sugar Trust
Trial,
Mr. CHAPMAN IN COURT TODAY
The Men, who Would Not Give
Evidence to the Comm tee.
BRILLIANT LEGAL TALENT

| Cole in Criminal Court No. 1. District At
| torney Arthur A. Birney represented the
government and seated with him were
| Assistant District Attorneys Hugh T. Tag
| cart and Tracy L. Jeffords. Mr.. Chapman's
! legal representatives are ex-senator Ed
| munds. Judge Jere M. Wilson and Judge
| Dittenhoefer of New York, the latter hav-
| ing been retained as counsel for MIR. Chap
| man yesterday. All the attorneys were in
attendance this morning, were Mr.. John
| w. Mccartney, the well-known Washing
| ten broker, and Mr.. John Schriver of the
| New York Mail and Express. against whom
| similar indictments are pending. The at
torneys for the defendants in the other
similar cases were among the many in
terested spectators in the court room.
The Case Opened.
After the jury, selected Friday last, had
been called and the members took seats in
/ the box. District Attorney Birney began
| the opening address for the government.
Mr.. Birney recited that in 1887 combina-
| ton of refiners was formed, known as the
sugar trust which controlled the output
! OF ~ per cent of the sugar manufactured
| in the United States. In 1880 Congress
passed an act, known as the Mckinley bill.
! 1t excited great public attention, and i'm
posed tariff on all sugar above a certain
grade
In 1898 change in the political situation
III
House Of Representatives, known as the
| Wilson bill, one of it's provisions being the
placing of sugar on the free list. Such, of
| course, was detrimental to the sugar trust.
and 1t sought to protect itself, because the
introduction of every pound of sugar from
| abroad would be ruinous to the trust.
Sugar stock fell. The bill was passed in
the House February 1, 1894, and was sent
| to the Senate. There amendments were Of
| fered, first by the finance committee, to
| whom 1t had been referred. This amend
ment provided for a tariff on sugar, and
thereupon stock arose. Later other amend
ments were offered, and the newspapers
were full of what purported to be full
/ account Of the proceedings in the Senate
regarding the amendments.
The articles were sensational in charac-
ter, some charging that certain members
had acted dishonesty and accepted brides.
This created great scandal, and the Senate
then passed a resolution appointing a
against the Senators mentioned.
In pursuance of that resolution five men,
bers were appointed, with Senator Gray as
very promptly disposed of. and later the
committee, endeavored to determine
whether any of the Senators had been
dealing in. sugar stock. Mr.. Elverton f.
Chapman of the firm of Moore 4 Schley
was called as witness. He was asked if
| the firm had bought or sold any sugar
stock for any Senator and he replied: Il
other questions of a similar nature, but
his replies were the same. That refusal to
answer. In tbs opinion of the government,
Is violation of section 1o2 of the Revised
Statutes of the United States.
Gentlemen of the jury concluded Mr..
Birney. ''all the questions of law have been
passed upon by the court, and the only
not the questions were asked and whether
or not Mr.. Chapman declined to answer.
as charged
The defense reserved its opening.
~s Evidence offered.
Evidence was then offered by Mr. Brney
| in thershape of the acts of the state of New
! Jersey, under which the American Sugar
Refining Company wss corporated This
| met with objection from Judge Dittenhoefer
! on the ground that the copies offered in evil
dence were not properly certified, but after
| considerable argument the court oyerruled
| the objection and an exception was noted
An extract from the journal of the Senate
| was next presented. showing the Wilson bill
| as sent to the Senate by the House. This
was also objected to on the ground that the
act was not set forth in the Indictment, that
being fatal variance between the proof
and the Indictment. The objection was
| passed for the time. subject to discussion
later. n..-.
), When taken up Judge Cole decided to ad-
| init the copy, of the extract from the Sen
ate journal and the usual exception to the
| ruling was asked. AS
| The district attorney went on to read
! from the free list Of the Wilson bill He
stopped suddenly on reaching the word
| ''molasses," and ex-senator Edmunds dryly
remarked:
He's stuck on molasses." The utterance
! caused general smile.
Further objection was made to the ad-
mission of the extract from the Senate
| journal in evidence. but after lengthy
| gument the court ruled against the defense.
Mr. Birney., continuing. read from the
| report of the committee on finance and the
amendments to the Wilson bill proposed by
| The defense gave notice that it would
enter general objection to all extracts from
| the Senate journal. certified by the Sec
| rotary. that might be offered in evidence
| by the district attorney, for the reason
certify to the meaning intended by Sena-
| tors in proposed amendments offered by
| them.
The resolution reciting that articles ap-
peared in the New York Sun and the Phil
adelphia Press to the effect that certain
Senators had accepted brides. and pro-
viding for the appointment Of the invesu-
eating committee, was read by Mr.. Bir-
ney after which the usual noon recess was
taken.
During recess Mr.. Birney was in con-
| sultation with Senator Gray, who was
chairman of the investigating committee:
Harry Smith, clerk Of the committee and
Mr.. Layton, an official of the Senate The
gentlemen mentioned were among the
prominent spectators during the proceed
irgs in court.
The Subpoena.
After recess Mr.. Birney called as the
first witness for the government Mr.. Will
liam A. F. feldsr employed by the Senate as
file clerk. sHerhad with him and identified
a volume containing the original subpoena.
signed byQSenator Gray, commanding Ell
verton R!eChapman to appear before the
Senate Investigating committee. This SUBJ
poena was Endorsed by Sergeant-at-arms
r. ]. Bright as having been served on Mr..
Chapman june Z, 1894, through a deputy,
B. W. LaytonH
Ex-senator Edmunds submitted that Mr..
Chapman was not lawfully summoned, as
the subpoena should have been served by
| the sergeant-at-arms in person, the official
| having nogpovgr to name deputy in such
a case The court ruled that the service
was legal.
B. w Laytoh, the next witness, testified
| that he is an emplove in the office of the
| sergeant-at-arms of the Senate, and served
| the subpoena ION Mr.. Chapman at his Of
| flee ON Broadway, New York, June Z, 1894
william C.. Prentiss, member Of the
| bar of the Supreme Court of the District
| Of Columbia, and also stenographer, stat
| ed that he took the testimony in short
| bend oiven nv Mr. Chairman hefora tho