Barre evening telegram. (Barre, Vt.) 1898-19??, 1898-08-17
HOT SHOT FOR AN EARL
English Peer on Witness Stand In the
llooley Case.
FORCED INTO ADMISSIONS,
larl De la War; Comedies Receiving
Money From the Promoter AS a
Glft-One Witness Faints
While Testifying.

London, Aug. lin the queens bench
division Of the high court of justice JUS
tice Wright resumed the hearing of the
motion to commit Earl De la War;,
Messrs. Broadley, Bradshaw and Ruck-
err for contempt Of court in attempting
to induce Mr.. Ernest Terah Hooley the
bankrupt company promoter, to falsify
his evidence in the bankruptcy court.
Mr.. Hooley, who was sworn, explained
the discrepancy between his own state
ment that he had paid Earl De la
War; $4,000 and the earl's statement
that he had only received f25000 by
saying that he paid the latter G25,OO0
directly and subsequently paid him an
equal amount through Mr.. Broadley,
Mr.. Hooley's agent, for division be-
tween Earl De la War; and Lord AL
bemarle. Mr.. Hooley said he had since
discovered that Broadley kept the E25,-
900.
Regarding Earl De la Wars alleged
offer of Ct, 900 if he (Hooley) would con-
tradict his former evidence, the bank
rupt said Mr.. Broadley at the Bruins
wick hotel offered him the money in the
earls presence, and the correction of
this statement which Earl De la War;
wished him to make was written out
there, Mr.. Hooley deposed, in the pres
ence of the earl.
One Summons Dismissed.
After severe cross examination, in
which Mr.. Hooey 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..
Hooleys position, offered to pay Hoo
leys hotel bill for a month and said he
was prepared also to help Mrs. Hoo!ey
to the extent of G1,000.
Earl De la War;, Mr.. Bradshaw de-
clared, asked him not to let Mr.. HColey
know of the offer as the matter might
be construed as an attempt at bribery.
1t was understood, at the same inter
view, that Mr.. Hooey would be asked
to correct his original evidence. While
on the stand Mr.. Bradshaw tainted.
Earl De la War; was next sworn,
and he repeated in substance the testi-
mony he had already given before the
registrar in bankruptcy, to the effect
that he received nothing for becoming a
ulTectOT III tuc buliiol company Va A"'
introducing others to Mr.. Hooley. He
admitted that he had suggested to Mr.
| Bradshaw that the latter could perhaTs
induce Mr.. Hooley to correct certain
misstatements.
De la War; Makes Admission.
During cross examination, with ref
erence to his telegram to Mr. Hcoley
asking him to make 1t clear that he
(the earD did not have 100000 on ac-
count of the fotation of the Dunlol
company. the earl said his only objec,
was to get Mr.. Hooley to correct wrong
statements, adding:
II never saw the paper alleged tt
have been written at the BrunsWicF
hotel"
Earl De la War; acknowledged re-
ceiving $4,000 as a gift. He said ina
he subsequently received 41,30o ane
that at a later date borrowed flo'ooo
but this money was not paid him fol
Joining the directorate. Later. the ear
said. he was released from this debt D!
Mr.. Hooley. He admitted that he knew
that Lord Alhemarle received I9'oo'
and Mr. Rrcadley cS,o00. When nj
questioned Eooley with relation 10 MI
misstatements. be deposed that the lat
ter replied
"That is all right. I did not know
what I was saying