Evening star., 1897-06-15
Newspaper Correspondent Arraigned
on the Charge of Contumaoy.
FOURTH OF TIE SUGAR TRUST CASES
A Mass of Documents introduced
and Admitted as Evidence.
PROCEEDINGS IN DETAIL

press, was today placed on trial before
Judge Bradley in Criminal Court No. .. to
answer the indictment returned against
him July 8, 1894, charging him with hav-
| ing refused to answer certain questions
propounded to him in June, 1894. by Sem
| ator Grays sugar trust investigating COM
| mittee.
Mr.. Shriver is the fourth alleged con-
tumacious sugar trust witness 10 undergo
| the ordeal Of a criminal trial. Mr.. Elvcrtcn
r. Chapman, the first one. having been
convicted. while President Henry o. Have
meyer and Secretary and Treasurer John
E. Searles of the American Sugar Refining
Company the so-caiIed sugar trust. were
| acquitted by direction OF the court Judge
Bradley.
In May, 1894, Mr.. Shriver wrote his pa
per an account of conference said to
have taken place in this city, at the Ar
lngton Hotel, between repr esentatives of
the sugar trust and members of the Sem
ate committee having in charge the maxi
ing, up OF the sugar schedule of the Wilson
tariff bill. When Mr.. Shriver was sum-
moned before the investigating committee.
he was requested by the chairman of the
committee. Senator Gray of Delaware. to
give the name of the person from whom he
| received the information on which his ar
ticle was based.
Declined to Answer.
| counsel, although he volunteered the state
ment that his informant was a memoer CT
| the House of Representatives.
When the trial was called yesterday q
| week ago. a continuance was granted until
today by Judge Bradley because of the un-
avodable absence of Senator Lodge of
Massachusetts. and Stenographer Boswell.
| two important witnesses for the govern
ment.
The court room was well filled when the
case was called today. Mr.. Shriver, who
arrived early this morning from the south
with the presidential party, was represent
ed by ex-Judge A. ]. Dttenhoefer of New
York ard Mr.. Jere NJ. Wilson of this city,
the government being represented by Dis-
trict Attorney Davis and Assistant District
Attorney Baker
After Mr.. Shriver had waived the reading
of the Indictment, and had entered a plea
| of not guilty, jury was quickly selected,
both sides signifying their satisfaction with
the flrsS twelve men called as follows: c.
N Fowler, Charles Toomb. Lawrence A.
| Callan. Arthur b. Smith, Frank N. Cissel.
George Schwab. Ezekiel Tignor, Jonathan
K1ock Grant Green. Lawrence q. Fletcher,
Thomas c. Polhick. -
Mr. Davis States the Case.
District Attorney Davis explained the
case to the jury. reading the story written
by Mr.. Shrtver, and which appeared In
the Mail and Express. Mr.. Davis also
read extracts from the proceedings before
the Senate committee during the examina-
ton of Mr.. Sriver, in which it appeared
that the witness stated that his Informant
heard of the alleged conference at the Ar
lington Hotel from wire manufac. .urer, who
occupied an adjoining room at the hotel,
and was said to have overheard the con-
ference. Mr.. Shriver, Mr.. Davis claimed,
peremptorily refused to answer the in
quiry, an inquiry which would be shown
to be, remarked Mr.. Davis. "a pertinent
one and within the jurisdiction OF the Sem
ate to make"
Defense Reserves Opening.
Counsel for the defense reserved their
opening, and then Mr.. Davis introduced a
great mess of documentary evidence. which
was admitted, subject 10 the objections OF
the defense. This documentary evidence
was a history of the Senate's inquiry, and
of all the matters which led up to IL, iden-
tical with that introduced in the Havemey-
er and Searles cases.
Mr.. Davis also introduced certain doc
umentary evidence to show that the in
vestigating committee reported to the SEN
ate that Mr.. Shriyer was a recusant wit
hess. and that thereupon, in conformity
with the requirements Of the law, the Vice
President reported that fact to the dis
trict attorney, whereupon the indictment
followed.
Senator Gray a Witness.
Then, IS the first witness for the gov
ernment, Mr.. Davis called Senator Gray OF
Delaware to the stand. He stated that he
was chairman of the Investigating COM
mittee, and RENE embered that Mr.. Shriver
appeared before the committee a wit
ness. When Mr. Davis asked the senator
as to the article written by Mr.. Shriver,
Mr.. Dittenhoefer, in objecting to the dis
trict attorneys question, outlined the de-
fense. He called attention to the fact that
the article did not appear until two days
after the investigating committee was ap-
pointed, and for that reason, submitted
Mr.. Dittenhoefer, the article was not, could
not have been. referred to by the Senate in
adopting the resolution authorizing the in
vestigation ard the appointment Of the
committee. Judge Bradley. however, allow
ed the question to be put, counsel for the
defense reserv1ng an exception, and stat
ing that they will later in the trial put
their objection In another motion.
Senator Gray then went on to say that
authorship of the article. to divulge the
name of his informant He declined to an
swer, further than to say that his inform
ant was a member Of the House Of Repre-
sentatives.
Defense Reveals a Point.
To refresh his memory. Senator Gray was
reading from a printed record Of the COM
mittee's proceedings when counsel for the
defense by an objection, divulged another
ground of defense. They objected on the
ground that a reading of all Of the record
would show that Mr.. Shriver never did in
fact refuse to answer, but merely declined
to do 30 at that particular time. That is,
that Mr.. Shriver declined, as he explained
to the committee. to reply for the pres
ent." In other words. argued Mr.. Shriver's
counsel, the government ought not to be
allowed to place In evidence. through the
senator. parts Of the committees proceed
ings which do not relate to the questions
contained In the Indictment.
Judge Bradley Cverruled the objection,
stating, however, that the matter can
properly c,me Up later in the case. Sena-
tor Gray then identified Mr.. Shriver's ar
ticle. repeating the statement that Mr..
Shriver again and again declined to an
swer. On tie cross-examination. however,
Senator Gray stated to Mr.. Dittenhoefer
that It 70 true that Mr.. Shriver dtd explain
that he would "fcr the present" refuse to
give the committee the name OF his in
forme mt. At Mr.. Dittenhoefer's request,
Senator Gray read at some length from the
printed rep<yt of the committee's procsed-
ings. showing that Mr.. Shriver was on
three different occasions given time by the
committee In which to more fully answer.
but that on every occasion he merely ex-
planned that for the present" hs would