The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1897-05-28

arms and kissed her He then put he
down and she ran back to her mother.
II don't know who the child is, said
Mr.. Havemeyer, "but think it is good
omen. -
Judge Bradley was exactly 10 minutes
late. With solemnity he announced that
the propositions upon which the motion
OF the defence was founded involved
questions of great importance, questions
which could not be decided by the court
without the most careful consideration,
especially that one which related to the
power and Jurisdiction of the special COM
mittee appointed by the United States
Senate +,.rs
1t had been impossible for the the court
in the few minutes since the argument
Terminated to consider carefully and ac-
curately the grave questions involved,
but holding that question in allegiance
the court had given enough consideration
to the other questions involved to, enable
| it to dispose of the motion of the defence.
As to the grave question of the power and
| jurisdiction of the Senate committee. the
court could not enter upon that without
further thought. Judge Bradley then
proceeded carefully to review the indict-
ment He read the statute prescribing
the punishment (tine and imprisonment
for default or refusal to answer questions
of a congressional committee and re-
viewed the decisions of the court OF ap-
peals and the supreme court in the Chap
man case. The questions asked Of Mr.,
Ravemeyer and Mr.. Chapman differed
tended to establish the facts as given in.
the Indictment, Judge Bradley said.
But, he asked, was the defendent guilty
of contempt. This he said depended up
two flrAorNN FtrCf
mittee have jurisdiction and was the
question pertinent; second, did the
question demand facts Within the posses
sion of the witness. A negative to either
OF these propositions, the judge said,
would require the court to sustain the
motion. The witness, the judge said, was
not asked to produce the books which
| would show the data as to local and state
| political contributions, but the data from
these books. He was not asked as to any
thing within his own knowledge and
recollection. Judge Bradley then read
the question in extenso. Part of that
question Mr.. Havemeyer had answered.
He had said that there were no contribu
| lions as to national affairs, as to state and
local he had said there were contributions
| but OF their particulars he had no per-
sonal knowledge. Could it be commended,
| the judge asked, that Mr.. Havemeyer had
| personal knowledge of this data? He
| thought not The witness was subpoenaed
to give facts within his knowledge" He
was not called upon to prepare himself
ZOE any questions the committee might
| ask. He was only summoned to give
competent testimony" not to give data
| from records and books
| Could it be said that the witness was in
default when he refused to answer
questions beyond his knowledge? Could
he be held in default for failure to pro-
dIJRn xrvlao hn moi xvnl
J with a summons ''duces tecum. Judge
| Bradley said he had sought presidents
and found q case somewhat in point. A
defendant was ordered to produce his
books before a referee. He did SO and was
ordered to leave them for examination.
This the defendant declined to do and the
court held that he was not in contempt
| because in the summons he was not or
dered to leave the books. Several other
cases on the same lines were cited. More
| over, the judge continued, there was no
evidence that an examination of the books
had one been made would have refreshed
| a dormant memory.
| Mr.. Havemeyer had testified, said the
| judge, as to the contributions for state
and local elections he had stated that he
| had no particular date and the law did
not require him to produce the books.
The allegations was that he had refused
to answer the questions, the proof was
that he had answered them.
No court in christendom,' said the
Judge in conclusion, would hold him
guilty of contempt, and if he is not guilty
of contempt then this case is baseless. 1t
is not necessary to decide whether the
Senate committee had jurisdiction to in
quire whether the sugar corporation had
contributed to state and local campaigns
When that question is raised the court
will decide it. There are other subsidiary
questions in support of the motion of the
defense but it is unnecessary to go into
| them now. The court sustains the motion
and instructs the jury to return a verdict
of not guilty.
There was great deal of commotion in
the court room as Judge Bradley con-
cluded The newspaper men rushed out
to bulletin their papers the result and
there was general evidence of rejoicing at
the table Of Mr.. Havemeyer's counsel
| When order was restored the jury in ac-
cordance with the instructions of the
court returned verdict of not guilty.
| District Attorney Davis announced that
the trial of John E. Searles, the secretary
of the sugar company would be called to-
morrow, wherein the court adjourned.
ARRESTED FOR FRAUD.