The herald., 1897-10-16
THE BROOKS CLAIM
Some Explanations Made and the Case
Submitted

Yesterday morning Congressman Bar
examination. Mr.. Davis was anxious
that he explain certain expressions in
his correspor dence with Attorney
Brooks. The first of these read: Il am
sorry our pastures are so limited but
another day will come"
Witness stated that Brooks expected
to have a share in the patronage, and
he (witness) was perfectly content that
he should think SO if it pleased him. He
meant that the patronage was very linn
tied, but that if he remained in con-
gress for twenty years or 80 that mat
ter might be worth discussing.
The next letter taken up by Mr.. Denis,
and identified by the witness, contained
the following paragraph: Il am sure
of some fine business opportunities dur
ing my term, and shall be glad when the
session opens" Mr.. Denis was desirous
of having this explained.
Il had been up to San Francisco" said
Mr.. Barlow; "been called up to San Jose
didn't know but what had written
a more definite letter than that in rela-
tion to it. I was there in regard to the
Pedro Cheboya land case. They had
written to me about it and said they
would like to have me take it up. I
went up and examined into it, and
thought there was merit in it. OF course
didn't know anything about the legal
aspect Of it, but Brooks had said he
would be glad to assist me with his legal
knowledge al any time. went up there
and looked into the case. But when l
got back to Washington found that it
was absolutely illegal for a member of
congress to have anything to do with
such a case"
THAT is your explanation Of that SEN
tence?"
"Yes sir"
"And you have no other explanation
to make?"
Eyes, sir; that Is what I meant to
say"
And the some fine business oppor-
tunities' was a definite employment
about which you had been consulted 2"
Il will say frankly that they offered
that If it could, be secured they would
give 25 per cent of the face of the claim
1t was very large claim-4O, ,OOO-ac
land claim there"
DO you mean to say" interrupted
Judge Shaw, that you didn't know it
was illegal for a member of congress
to advocate claim against the United
States?"
YES"
The letter regarding the appointment
Of cadet appointed to Annapolis con-
tained' the remarks by the writer that
"One would think there was fortune in
it. and perhaps there is" Mr.. Barlow
explained this by saying that when he
promised Brooks to appoint young
Thorn he did so because, at that time
there was no one else in nomination;
later, however, people were just tumb-
ling over themselves in the attempt to
get the appointment, and it was merely
as a comment made on the eagerness
displayed in the contest that the quoted
remark was made.
Both plaintiff and defense rested their
case, and Mr.. Denis said, as the case was
one entirely of fact, and the statements
of plaintiff and defendant were diamet-
rically opposed, he was willing, if the
defense agreed, to submit the case with
out argument. Judge Hutton, of counsel
for the defense, differed and thought the
questions for the court were questions
Of law. The counsel were thus in the
same position as their clients, and final
ly it was decided to submit briefs. The
defendant was granted five days and
the plaintiff three days within which to
reply.