Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1897-06-21
Another Of the Alleged Contumacious
Witnesses Acquitted Today.
DISTRICT ATTORNEY DAVIS ASSENrS
Government Admits Plea of Not
Guilty Was Well Founded.
MIR. MCCARTNEY ON TRIAL

| trial before Judge Bradley I'm criminal
Court No. this morning. on the indict-
| ment which was returned against him Oc~
tober !. 1884
| Mr. Seymour was summoned and apo
| peared before the investigating committee
and was asked by the chairman of the CONS
| mittee whether any United States senator
had dealt with fis firm. directly or through
| an agent in sugar trust stocks during the
| winter and spring of 1884. He refused TO
answer. so the indictment charges. ana
| thereby violated. the government contends.
section 1H2 of the Revised Statutes which
makes such refusal misdemeanor.
MI. Seymour. who stands. the government
claims. in precisely the same position i'm the
matter occupied by Mr. Elyerton II ,hap-
man, who was convicted. and who served
thirty days in Jail for refusing to answer
was represented by Mr.. Jerc NJ Wilson
who was also of counsel for Mr. Chapman.
the government being represented 10y Dis-
trict Attorney Davis and Assistant District
Attorney Baker.
No trouble was eXperiencea I'm th., s,l.c-
ton of a jury, the first twelve called being
acceptable to both sides. They were Jacob
West. c. n. Fowler. Charles Tcomb. Law
renee A. Callan, Arthur ls. Smith, Henry
F. Getz. George Schwab Ezekiel Tignor,
Jonathan klock. Grant Green. Lawrence
| G. Fletcher and Thos. c. Pollck
Mfr. Baker Opens the Case.
Mr.. Baker explained the case to the jury
on behalf of the government detailing how
the investigating committee came to he
appointed, for what purpose and how and
said when Mr.. Seymour was asked If hts
firm executed any order i'm sugar trust
stocks for any United States senator d.
rectly or through an agent, he refused 10
answer.
The defense reserved its opening address,
and as his first witness District Attorney
Davis called Mr.. Wm. c. Prentiss. a MEM
ber of the local bar, who was at the time
of the investigation a stenographer. and
such took Mr.. Seymour's testimony bs fore
the Senate committee. He stated that he
mas lost his original notes. but said that
the printed report of the proceedings be-
fore the committee correctly stated the
testimony of Mr.. Sc ymour.
Senator Cushman X. Davis of Minneso-
ia, a member of the investigating commit
tee, testified TO the questions asked
| Mr.. Seymour and as to his refusal to
Swer. Frank s. Bright, clerk to the SER
geant-at-arms of the Senate. testified that
subpoena summonlng MIR. Seymour
witness was issued by the serseant-at-
arms, and telegram was sent 10 New
York notifying him of the issuance OF The
subpoena, ami inquiring if he would come
on and testify. Whether Mr. seymour
ever received the telegram Mr.. Bright said
he did not know.
The Government Rests.
After Mr.. Davis had introduced certain
documentary evidence. showing, among
ported to the Senate by the committee as
being a contumacious witness. and that
the Vice President reported :he matter 10
District Attorney Birney, who secured SUBJ
sequently the indictment of Mr.. Seymour,
he announced the close of the govern
ments case. when Mr. Wilson promptly
asked the court to return verdict of rot
guilty, basing his motion on the ground
that Mr.. Seymour was never duly served
with a summons.
I.l.1
court, however, at the suggestion of Mr..
Davis, and MI. Wilson recalled Mr. Prem
tiss for the purpose of cross-.Namining
him.
Mr.. Prentiss Cross-ENnmined.
Mr.. Wilson showed by his cross-exami-
naticn of MIR. Prentiss that Mr.. Seymour
complained that his testimony bad been
incorrectly reported, and that later in his
testimony he stated to the committee that,
SO far as he knew. no order had been eN-
ecuted by mis- firm tor any United States
senator in sugar stocks.
About the same Information was elected
by Mr.. Wilson in his cross examination Of
Senator Davis, and then Mr.. Davis called
as witness MIR. Harry III. Smith. who
was clerk of the investigating committed.
Mr.. Smith tesufying as to the loss of the
original subpoena.
After Mr.. Davis had secured the issuance
OF subpoena duces tecum, directing the
secretary of the Senate TO produce certain
records for the purpose of showing thai
subpoena was issued requiring the attend
ance OF Mr.. Seymour, MIR. Wilson said he
would admit that il issued, Mr.. Davis
admitting that only the telegrapnic copy
was sent to Mr.. Seymour. Mr.. Wilson
then called attention to MIR. Seymour's
statement before the committee subsequent
to his first examination, that so far as he
knew no senator had bought sold sugar
stocks.
That, too." explained Mr. Wilson, after
not only every member of the INVESTIGATING
committee had sworn that he had not dealt
In sugar stocks. but also every other mem-
ber of the Senate, with one exception had
SO testified. That exception was Senator
Quay. who manfuny stated that he had
dealt In the stocks, as he had a perfect
right to do.''
senator Quay's Ded.
And v 10 asked" remarked Judge Brad.
ley, what they were going to do about it'
Yes. yorr honor" said Mr. Wilson, and
with dre respect to the members of the
investigating committee. all of them men
OF the Highest character, I must say that
after every sei.ator had SO testified 1t was
childs play to further interrogate Mr. Sey-
mour."
Probably they wanted to see more (Sey-
meur) OF It," punned the court.
Possibly So" said Mr.. Wilson: but I
cannot see how the district attorney can
even ask. much less expect. a conviction
In this Gaze. H. fact, II should never have
occH troCSnt therefore, on the ground
that the defendant subsequently fully an
swered the question and on the ground
that he was not duly summoned I ask
that tie jury be directed to return a yer-
dict OF not guilty.
Mr. Seymour Acquitted.
Mr.. Davis" inquired Judge Bradley, lis
there anything In the evidence outside OF
the matter OF summons to sustain a verdict
Of guilty in this case?"
No, your honor" replied the district at
torney. there is not. I am compelled in
all candor to say that Mr.. Seymour ought
not to be convicted
Gentlemen of the jury" said Judge Brad
ley. lit is very clear that, as the district
attorney admits. there fs nothing In this
case to sustain q verdict OF guilty, and you
guilty. "
The Jury did as the court directed. and
after Mr. seymour bad abeen formally d.,
charged Mr.. Davis called the last OF tine