The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-01-19

honest man. I took an interest in his
campaign.
Q. Mr., Grant has had the hearty sup
port of your paper. has he not?
a. Oh, yes indeed.
@. From the beginning of the time when
he first began to have Senatorial aspira-
tons?
A No, l don't believe the paper men
toned Mr.. Grant
g. So far as you know.
A. Or said a kindly word of him until
Rfter-I don't think it did, until after the
gubernatOrial fight in the State conven-
ton. ! don't believe it said a kind word
Of hinl-I don't believe we said anything
of him.
Q. Well. Mr.. Brown, were you not
actively the advocate of Grant for the
United States Senate q long time before
the State convention At which the pres
ent Governor was nominated?
Q. You took part in the fight with ref
erence TO gaining a United States Senator
from the south, did you not?
Q. And for that purpose wrote numer-
Gus editorials which were printed in the
a. Advocating that measure?
Q. Advocating the measure Of defeat
ing southern candidate for Governor,
did you not?
A. Well, of course, naturally the Gov
ernor-the southern candidate for Cover
nor would be
@. The object and aim OF your paper
was to defeat the nomination of south
ern man for Governor in order that 1t
might not stand in the way of the Sc
lection of southern man for Senator. Is
that not true?
sion OF opinion OF the south. we took
about that view of it.
Q. And in that matter what you wrote
and what you said and what you did was
in the interest of L. S. Grant Jr as youL
choice for Senator from the south?
A. Not so much as harmony in the Re-
publican party.
Q. Was it at all so?
A. In the interest OF Grant?
a. It was in the interest of a Senator
from the south. whoever he might be.
Q. Well, at that time was not Mr.. Grant
personally your choice?
A. Wen we published a very nice pic
ture of Mr.. Gage and did not charge
him anything. when he was candidate
for Senator, and also Mr.. Bulla and Mr.
Grant.
9. Was not at that time Mr.. Grant
a. 1 would rather have seen him win
and would still.
Q. And it was understood between you
and Mr.. Grant that you would advocate
the interests of Mr.. Grant from the be-
ginning of his campaign for Senator, was
it not?
A Through the press?
=. Through the Wave?
A. Oh, no; We never had any under
standing about that. I don't own the
w ave.
Q. But you are editorial writer for the
Wave?
Mr.. AIellick-Who owns the Wave?
A. I do portion. | am part owner.
Mr. Cosgrave is the other.
Q. You are part owner?
a. | cannot dictate its policy.
Q. You have. voice in It's policy?
A. Yes, but / could not consult with Mr..
Grant and dictate the policy.
q. Well. had you any consultation with
Mr. Grant and your co-owner as to the
policy of the Wave with reference to Mr..
A No. l took this method. Mr.. Chair
man. | wrote to every newspaper south
of Tehachapi and asked them what was
the sentimant of the people in their COM
munity. l think l wrote 100 letters. and
out of those letters l got replies to more
than a majority of them saying that they
wanted Senator, and they wanted moth
my partner. On that basis We proceeded
TO fight for Senator from the south.
Q. Now, in that matter Mr.. Grant paid
you for your services, did he not?
A No. sir. he did not. I haze never
received a dollar of money from Mr.. Grant
for my services. nor has Mr.. Green
Not a fraction OF a cent.
o Q. At whose suggestion Old you become
the general adviser of Mr.. Grant with ref
erence TO his Senatorial aspirations?
A. Will my answer TO this tend to con-
Vict anybody of using money to secure
the election of a United States Senator?
O. Not to my knowledge.
A. Well. ! do not think scarcely, Mr.
Chairman, that is pertinent
@. Well you will have to permit the
committee to be the judges of that ques-
ton. If you refuse TO answer
A. Well, Mr.. Green wanted me to go
o. What was said to you by Mr. Green
with reference to taking an advisory part
in the campaign?
A. Oh, we went over list of men in
the south. We picked on Grant.
=. What l mean by my question is this:
To define as nearly as possible your re-
lations as adviser TO Grants campaign.
Now. was Mr.. Grant to submit 10 your
judgment and that of Mr.. Green as to how
his candidacy should be conducted?
A. Very largely, except that they We're
70 be confined 10 honest lines, of course
legitimate methods and purposes.
Q. Yes. Was anything said between you
as TO what constituted legitimate pur-
poses?
A. Why, no 1t is pretty apparent what
would be ilegitmate.
Q. You think you understand that prop
csition.
A. l think / have an idea
@. Well, Mr.. Brown, have you kept close
track on the candidacy Of Mr.. Grant
with reference to the chances he would
have if certain men throughout the State
were elected to the Legislature
A l kept pretty close-well, l figured
this way that most of the men who
would come TO the Legislature were I'M
trammeled. I considered that most of the
men who came to the Legislature and
were untrammeled would eventually vote
for Mr.. Grant. OF course, we always fig
ured that we had Mr.. Burns to oppose us:
That was the idea. Over a year ago I
thought Mr.. Burns would be a candidate
for the Senate. We always figured that
We would have him in opposition to US.
Our chief concern was who would not
vote for him.
@. Well now, Mr.. Brown, I will ask the
reporter to read to you the question, and
l think you Will see that your answer is
not responsive.
A. You asked me if I had kept close
track.
c. Yes.
A. I will say reasonably close.
Q. You knew who were nominated in the
several districts of the State for the Leg
islature, pretty good general knowledge,
had you not?
a Wei, you know I was absent from
tho State sixty days during the campaign.
@. am only speaking of such people as
you knew?
A. You mean did I know them person.
ally?
THE EVENING SESSION.