The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-08-17
AN ENGLISH EARL IN COURT
THE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS
AGAINST DE La WAR;.
Promoter Hooley Testifies Concerning
the Alleged Attempt at Bribery
Admits That He Received Money.

London, Aug. 16.-In the queens
bench division of the high court of jus
tice today, Justice Wright resumed the
hearing of the motion to commit Earl
de Ia War;, Messrs. Bromley, Bradshaw
and Rucker for contempt of court in
attempting to induce Mr.. Ernest Terah
Hooley, the bankrupt company promo
tor, to falsify his evidence in the bank
/ ruptcy court.
| Mr.. Hooley, who was sworn, explain
ed the discrepancy between his own
statement, that he had paid Earl de la.
War; $4,000, and the earl's statement
that he had only received e25, 900, by
saying that he paid the latter 825. 900
directly and subsequently paid him an
equal amount through Mr. Bradshaw.
Mr.. Hooley's assent, for division between
Earl de la War; and Lord Albemarle.
Mr. Hooley said he had since discov-
cred that Bradshaw kept the ,0OO
Regarding Earl de la Wars alleged
offer of &1,000 if he (HoOley) would
contradict his former evidence, the
bankrupt said that Mr.. Bradshaw. at
the Brunswick hotel. offered him the
money in the earPs presence, and the
correction of certain statements which
Earl de la War; wished him to make
was written out there. Mr. HOOley
deposed in the presence of the earl.
After severe DISCRIMINATION in
which Mr.. Hooley stuck to his guns,
Justice Wright dismissed the summons
against Mr. Bradshaw. The latter then
went on the stand and asserted that
Earl de la War;, in the course of a
conversation with Bradshaw, as to Mr.
HoOley's position, offered to pay Hoo
ley'S hotel bill for a month, and said
he was prepared to help Mrs. Hooley to
the extent of $1,000. Earl de la War;,
Mn Bradshaw declared, asked him not
to let Mr.. Hall know Of the matter, as
it might be construed as an attempt
at bribery. 1t was understood at the
same interview that Mr.. HOoley would
be asked to correct his original evil
dence. While on the stand Mr. Brad
shaw tainted.
Earl de la War; was next sworn,
and he repeated in substance the tes-
timOny he had already given before the
registrar in bankruptcy as TO the eff
feet that he had received nothing for
being a director in the Dunlop COM
pany, or for introducing others to Mr..
HoOley. He admitted that he had sug-
gested to Mr.. Bradshaw that the latter
could, perhaps, induce Mr.. HoOley to
correct certain misStatementS.
During cross-examinatiOn, with ref
erence to his telegram to Mr.. HOOley,
asking him to make it clear that he
(the card did not have $4,000 on ac-
count of the flotation of the Dunlop
company, the earl said that his only
object was to get Mr.. Hooley to correct
wrong statements. adding: 'I never
saw the paper alleged to have been
written at the Brunswick hotel
Earl de Ia War; acknowledges re-
ceiving $4,000 as a gift. He said that
he subsequently received $4,000. and
at later date borrowed 10000 but
this money was not paid him for join
ing the directorate. Later, the earl
said he was released from this debt by
Mr.. Hooley. He admitted that he
knew that Lord Albemarle received
$4,000 and Mr.. Bradshaw 5000. When
he questioned HoOley with relation to-
his misstatements he deposed that the
latter replied: That is all right; I did
not know what 1 was saying, and 1
shall take the first opportunity to
stTaighten matters out.
Mr.. Bradshaw testified that there was
not word of truth in the statement
that he had intercepted moneys. He
Mr.. Hooley's evidence as
"a farrage of falsehoOds."
Justice Wright will deliver his decis-
ion tomorrow