Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1897-05-25

Mr. HaS emeyer to answer the questions.
The Introduction of the documentary evil
dence objected to was passed over for
time. in order to allow the defense TO ex-
anime 1t. And the Introduction of other
evidence of that kind wal suspended for a
time. that certain Senate witnesses might
testify and return to their duties.
The First Witness.
The first witness called by Mr.. Davis was
Harry r. Cunningham, the Senate file clerk.
who testified that the original of the sub
poena served upon Mr.. Havemeyer is miss
ing Counsel for Mr.. Havemeyer. however.
made the testimony of the witnesses I'M
necessary by admitting thai he was duly
subpcenaed and that he responded in an
sSsr TO It,
w c. Prentiss, a member of the local
bar. VINO acted as a Stenographer for the
Senate. was next called as a witness by the
district attorney. While he knew that one
Henry o. HaVemeyer testified before the
committee. he could not identify the de-
PENDANT as that person. Mr.. Prentiss pro-
Guced his original notes of Mr.. Havemey-
er's testimony before the committee. and
was proceeding to read them in detail,
when Mr.. johnson objected to that portion
of his clients testimony which set forth
that the Senate's sugar schedule in the
Wilson bin was much more favorable to
the defendants company than that in the
House bill. That, submitted Mr.. Johnson
was not pertinent to the issue. which is
whether the defendant refused to answer
i certain question. which. the government
tia'ms. was proper and pertinent.
Judge Bradley said he could not see that
he answers of the defendant referred to
were pertinent. and at the suggestion of
ME- Davis the matter was deferred until
later In the case.he insisting that he should
show just what Mr.. Havemeyer answered
in order 10 sustain the allegations in The
Indictment.
Mr. Prentiss Excused.
Mr.. Prentiss was excused from the stand,
and the district attorney called Stenos-
9apner Robert l.. Miller. MIR. Miller also
said he could not identify the defendant
as the Henry o. Havemeyer part of
whose testimony he took during the COM
nittee's investiga ton. The witness how
ever. stated that the committee witness.
Henry O. Havemeyer. was asked certain
question which he refused to answer. Read
ing from his original notes of M Hav,-
meyers testimony. the defense having ad-
fnittsi the identity of the defendant Mr.
Miller read the question Mr.. Havemeyar
refused TO answer, the one set out in the
Indictment
senator Gray u Witness.
Senator George Gray of Delaware, the
chairman of the Senate investigating COM
nittee. next took the witness stand. He
also said he did not know the defendant
but said that a Henry q. Havemeyer did
testify before his committee. and the sena-
tor gave in substance the question set out
in tbs indictment c 5 having been asked the
defendant. and said he refused to answer
1t. Senator Gray also stated that the re-
fusal of the defendant to answer resulted
in three different reports by the committee
TO the Senate. and on cross-exdmination
Mr.. Johnson was proceeding to show that
the Senate took no action any of the
reports. when Mr.. Davis objected.
tending that il was immaterial whether the
Senate did or did not act an any of the
raportS.
Mr. Johnson replied that. under the de-
cision of the United States Supreme Court
in the Chapman case. such a thing might
be shown in defense. The object of the
demonstrate that not only the com-
miitec. but also the Senate was in doubt
TO the right of the committee to ask the
question at issue
objections Ovcrruled.
Judge Bradley overruled Mr. Davis OBJ
lection. and Mr. Johnson. reading from a
report of the defendants testimony before
the committee, showed that Mr.. Have
meyer stated that he knew OF no contribu-
Tic ms made by his company or by any
member OF it for national campaign pur-
poses or TO influence the election of any
Cnited States senator.
Senator Gray also stated, in reply to MI
Johnson. that ne was under the impression
that tie unanswered question was nut TO
the defendant BY Senator Allen of the COM
nilttee- here was a difference among the
members of the committee as to the bro
priety Of Senator Aliens question. said Sem
asor Gray. but upon MIR Davis objection
he was not allowed to state wha: his
Gray 50 opinion was to the relevancy
or propriety of Senator Aliens question
hdI. IN answer TO question asked him by
the district attorney. Senator Gray said
that as he. chairman, put Senator AL
lens question to the defendant at the next
meeting OF the committee. he had no doubt
tnat the committee authorized him 20 pro-
pound the question.
In fact. said Senator Gray his best recol-
lection row is that the committee by vote
OF : 20 = directed the question to be asked
by hinI. and that Mr.. Havemeyer then re-
fused 10 answer 1t.
Court Takes a Recess
Senator Gray left the stand at 90. when
recess was taken until I few minutes of
2 Before leaving the stand he said that
II bis recollection served him Alright Mr.
HaEeneycr testified that his company
Made no contributions for political cam
paisn purposes to the na tior al committees
Ihe defendant had also said. Senator Gray
added. that he made no individual contrib
ut!ons. and that the contributions made lev
his company. for local purposes only
would be shown by the books of The com
pany.
when the trial was resumed after recase
among those present was Mr.. Elyerton X
chapman. whC was brought up from Jail.
wher. he Is serving a sentence of thirty
dzyS for commission of the same osfense
with which Mr.. Havereyer is charged
Nr. Chapman on the stand.
Mr. Chapman was summoned as Wit
ness for the government, and seated him
self near District Attorney Davis He
showed little the effects of eight days OF
confinement. his skin being slightly pal!id
He was warmly welcomed by a nur1ber
o. friends. but mOdestly bore the distinction
OF his position In response to inquiries,
he said ne felt very well His friends did
i.o' ned 10 be told that he is also In the
best " spirits.
The inst witness called by the govern
inert after recess was Senator William
Lindsay OF Kentucky. also a member OF the
senate Investigating committee He was
the FIRST witness TO fully identify the de-
PENDANT as the Henry o. Havemeyer who
t-stii:ed before the committee and as the
one who refused 10 answer the question 4,
q,-esI.Un.