Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-01-07
STILL MORE TESTIMONY
New York Witnesses in the Sugar Trust
Case.
Arguments by Counsel Concerning
Certain Lines of Evidence
Under the Constitution.

were promptly on hand when the case was
again taken up this morning before Judge
Cole in Criminal Court No. 1. Ex-senator
Edmunds was the first to arrive and he I'M
mediately engaged himself in the study of
law volume. Judge Dittenhcefer was &C.
cup!ed several moments IT. arranging row
of authorities, after which he conversed
earnestly with Judge Jere Wilson, while
Attorneys Nathaniel Wilson and Shella-
barger sat close by. District Attorney Blr-
ney chatted pleasantly with his assist
ants Messrs Taggart and Jeffords, and the
trio appeared confident Of success. A
larger attendance than yesterday was the
rule today, the spectators including many
prominent members Of the local bar.
Interest in the trial had evidently In
creased, owing probably to the fact that
the defense has demonstrated that 1t In
tends to fight every point to the extreme de-
gree.
When the court adjourned yesterday after
noon Stenographer Prentiss of the Senate
investigating committee was on the stand,
and the question of the right of the defense
to require him to read In full all the testi-
mony OF Mr.. Chapman before the committee
was in dispute. This morning Judge Will
son moved the court that the defense, by
crcss-examination of Mr.. Prentiss, be per-
mitted to prove that Mr.. Chapman declined
to answer the questions Of the committee on
the ground that he desired to consult coun-
sci, and after doing so announced that he
had been advised that under the Constitu-
ton he was not required to answer. The
testimony referred to was read by Judge
Wilson, and Mr.. Birney objected to the mo-
ton.
His Construction.
Judge Wilson read section 1O2 of the Re-
vised Statutes, as follows: Every person
who. having been summoned as a witness
by the authority of either house of Con-
gress to give testimony or produce papers
upon any matter under inquiry before
either house, CIR any committee of either
house of Congress, willfully makes default,
or who, having appeared. refuses to an
swer any question pertinent to the ques-
ton under inquiry, shall be deemed guilty
of miSdemeanor, punishable by fine Of
not more than $1,000. nor less than 500,
and imprisonment in q common Jail for not
less than one month, nor more than twelve
months"
Judge Wilson went on to argue that the
words "willfully' and pertinent mean
something in the statute. and that section
1O2 does not have the scope attributed to
it by the district attorney. The Senate
committee, he declared. sought to make
an unreasonable search into the private
affairs Of Mr.. Chapman. which was an in
weston of constitutional rights. Quoting
Justice Field of the United States Supreme
Court, Judge Wilson said that there Is
nothing more sacred than the security Of
citizen. not only as regards his personal
liberty. but also his private affairs. A
number Of authorities were quoted, and
the attorney declared Congress has not the
power to carry out, under section 102 Of
the statutes, what, under that section, it
is attic npted to carry out.
In the indictment all the facts must be
the case within the statute. There have
been cases in which the indictments were
worded exactly are the statutes, but
they have been held by the Supreme Court
asserted in the indictment that the offense
with which Mr.. Chapman is charged was
will fully done, according to Judge Wilson,
but 1t must be shown that such was the
case.
Constitution Greater.
We have a case here, said Judge Wilson.
an act of Congress on the one side and the
Constitution of the United States on the
other. On one hand the Constitution guar
antees to citizens the right to be protested
against unreasonable and improper inquiry
into his private affairs. On the other hand
is an act of Congress providing that if a
man Is summoned before a committee of
Congress and refuses to answer a question
he must go to Jail. Mr.. Chapman finds
himself in this position-I am granted pro-
lection by the Constitution while / am
laid open to assault by an act Of Congress.
Mr.. Chapman then seeks the advice of
learned counsel and is advised that he is
HOT required 10 OlSCiOSe MS private affairs
and he SO respectfully informs the commit
tee. That certainly was not willful viola
ton of law. The lawmakers did not in
tend to punish or disgrace a man who
would do an act under the belief that it
was lawful to do it.
At this point the usual noon recess was
taken. In addition to Mr.. Chapman, Broker
Mccartney, Secretary Searles of the Sugar
legged contumacious witnesses, were in court
today.
New York Witnesses.
After recess, Judge Wilson suspended his
argument in order that several witnesses
might be examined. This was done for the
convenience of the witnesses.
Mr.. George w. Ely. the secretary Of the
New York stock exchange, was placed on
the stand by the district attorney. He
stated that he has held the position for
thirteen years past, and added that the
stock of the American Sugar Refining Com
pany has been handled in the exchange. No
record, testified the witness, is kept of the
proceedings and he went on to explain that
a quotation ticker service is supplied to
various offices from the floor of the ex-
change.
THAT ticker service Is not always accur-
ate, is it?' asked Judge Dittenhofer.
'"That matter does not come under my
consideration" was the reply.
Francis E. Fitch Of Passaic, N. J., was
next called. He testified that he is the pub
n9her OF the New YORK STOCK exchange list,
intended to be a report Of the quotations of
the sales on the floor Of the exchange The
sales are secured by ticker service.
On cross-examination, Mr.. Fitch stated
that he has nothing to do with the printing
proper of the list, and has no personal
knowledge of the receipt Of the quotations
or of their accuracy, lle being the secretary,
treasurer and general manager of the Elk
change nting Company.
Mr.. Birney offered number Of copies Of
the exchange lists, as identified by Mr..
Fitch, in evidence, but the defense prompt
ly objected On the ground that the witness
knew nothing accurately regarding the
lists and therefore his testimony was hear
say, and the lists not competent.
Mr.. Birney maintained that the list could
be admitted. in accordance with two opin-
ions Of the Supreme Court. "One," he
said, 'is found in third Wallace, 114 cham
payne"
Gases Of champagne" remarked ex-
Senator Edmunds.
win 1t show the relation of champagne
end SUGAR. inquired Judge Cole, and a
general laugh followed.
One Of the jurors stating that he was
anxious to attend the funeral Of a member
of his family, the jury was then excused
until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock after
which Mr.. Birney continued to read the
opinion of the Supreme Court in support of
his position regarding the admissibility of
the exchange lists in evidence