The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-11-28
Mr.. HAYKEN TESTIFlES.
CONTINUED from Page u


will send the mayor and a committee
on to washington to help congressman
from here to have congress pass an
enabling act to increase the bonded
valuation of the city per cent, which
if passed by congress will give to the
city the where a with 10 also pay
cash and go ahead at once. At any
rate we. will by having the county
part surely have the city part-even II
later on. In another letter inclosed !
respectfully submit the information
you desire regarding courthouse at
Grand Haven, as also request for GER
tain information and prices OF articles
as mentioned, and possible needed Ior
courthouse here-requesting answer by
return mail.
That my request to personal re-
gard correspondence from here, may
have been surprising to you, may be
now satisfactorily answered by your
statement that Mr.. Canburn is no
longer with you'-for l had heard
from confidential letters written by
him to certain parties here that such
would happen, and | have felt that
perhaps accidentally he might have
access to my correspondence to your
company, and so as to avoid possible
competition arising from such, thought
it best to guard from"
In conclusion, I mention that Mr..
ty commissioners signed, and now on
his way TO New. Orleans and expects to
return from there to here in about
two weeks to work on city contract. a
letter received from Mr. Carey-also on
today--will be conveyed by me on to-
morrow-after consulting attorney in
De Golyer matter-as he requested.
Hoping to hear from you, believe me
to be yours very respectfully,
NJ HAYKEN.
P. S.-What, if anything, have you
been pleased to do about 'Dwyer?"
The roll call of the city council was
as follows: Bache, Clawson, Cohn,
Mccormick Norris, Newell and Rem
ington, sign of circle with angle line
drawn across; Corum, DAILY, Hardy,
Morris, O'Meara, Remington and
Young, sign of circle with an x across
it; Cheesman, 0 K; Lynn, doubtful;
Watson, partly o K. The explanation
Of the signs was as follows: Cross,
committee on city building; circle with
single line drawn across, sure K;
circle with X across, at work at.
who was the II. B. mentioned in
that letter." asked Judge Powers.
THAT is one of those things that it
is hard to explain"
did you mean yourself by H. B? ''
Il might have DONE
Did you mean Herman B2mberger,
and that you, by arrangement with
him, were going to add 80 per cent to
the cost?'
mo; 1 didn't mean Bamberger?''
Did you refer to any of the county
commissioners?
II don't know"
ut is the initials of Herman BAN
berger?''
Yes"
viii you swear you did not mean
Bamberg2r?''
Eyes. 1 don't know who I meant
then, but the 35 per cent is mistake;
it should be % per cent
How do you know it was mis-
take?"
Because 50 per cent was never
mentioned
Then what did you mean when you
wrote the house that 20 per cent was
for the county commissioners, per
cent for the architects and 10 per cent
extra for Andrews & Co., making So
per cent in all?'
1T was mistake; % per cent was
the most that was ever talked about"
Did Morris ask for % per cent?"
YES"
why didn't you say that before?"
I wasn't asked
you said in your previous testimony |
that Morris asked 20 per cent?
Yes, but I wasn't asked anything |
about % per cent
Are you telling the truth now?"
Yes
Were you sober when you wrote
that letter."
L think So
And you say you don't know who
you meant by Z. b. ?'
Yes
Were you of sound mind when you
wrote the letter.
Il think so"
And you considered yourself a
pretty shrewd man?'
Yes
so do l." said Judge Powers.
You wrote your house in June, 1892
Yes"
And you had the talks with Morris
in January and February, 1892"
Yes"
AT the trial in May when you were
asked to tell all that took place be-
tween you and Morris in Chicago in
January. 1896 why did you not say
anything about having gone to Adams
office with Morris?'
II did not think about it"
1T was an important matter?"
yes, l told Mr.. Varian about it. but
he did not ask me anything about it on
the stand"
Judge Powers then read the testimony
from which il appeared that Hayken
mad SAID ne mad told everything that
between the witness and Nor
ris when Norris was in Chicago in
January, 1896, and no mention of the
Adams incident was made.
DO you remember any other incident
between you and Morris at that time
hat you have not mentioned?"
Yes, L remember an excursion had
With Morris in Denver.
Did Adams come from Chicago with
TOu yesterday"
Yes
who is Adams?"
"A lawyer with whom I have had
some business.
Judge Powers then reverted in his ]
oss-exanaination to the alleged min ;
ng deal between Morris and the wit
hess.
You have had several mining deals?,
asked the judge.
No, never in my life
Your wife has?''
''Yes,she put some money into mines.
)ut never got any out"
Hayken'S previous testimony in re-
sard to the alleged sale of the Francis |
nine at Dugway to Hayken by Morris {
vas read, in which Hayken denied ever
purchasing the property and averred
hat the alleged mining deal was a
axe pure and simple.
This closed the cross-eXamination |
nd Mr.. Whittemore asked a few ques-
ions IN direct examination. Witness