Evening star., 1901-10-02

Continued from First Page.)
Flint. Eddy & Co., and Meikiejohn acqui-
esced in the idea.
How 1t Originated.
How did this question Of an appoint
ment originator asked Senator Cockrell.
Il think with Major Hawks, but cam
not recall exactly. / know IT was part
of the settlement agreed upon SO far as I
was concerned. think Mr.. Meiklejohn
was destrous Of treating Major Hawks
fairly, and that 1t was no fault OF his that
he was not retained
Col. Mcintyre did Mr.. Mefkiejohn in
any OF hfs conversations mention that he
was connected with this hemp PROPOSE
tton?" inquired Senator Harris.
Il cannot recall anything of the sort"
Ibid he mention Col. Heistands connec-
II do not recall that, either
Senator Cockrell handed witness memo
randum and asked him who ]. H. Ralston
was. After telling him Mr.. Ralston was a
local lawyer and that he believed Mr.. Raj
ston previous to the settlement had been
engaged by Major Hawks to conduct posi-
Bile legal steps, witness said the memo
randum shown him was written by him to
Mr.. Ralston, and in it he declared the set
tfernent had been made upon the under
standing that Hawks would be appointed.
II can state" said the witness, that 1
would not have accepted the $3.50 In set
tlement had 1t not been for the understand
Ing that Major Hawks should receive an
appointment. The settlement was based
entirely on that condition" In reply to a
question by Senator Proctor witness reiter-
ated his statement that Mr.. Meiklejohn had
said that an appointment would not be
given Hawks until the pecuniary settle
ment was completed and the papers In
Hawks possession turned over.
Cross-examined by Mr.. Needham, witness
said Dudley and Miehener had told him
WffnRSS
said he recalled having written a letter to
Col. Heistand in December, 1899, calling
attention to Mr. Hawks claim. The letter
was read by Senator Cockrell. 1t recited
the connection of the witness as already
shown. Col. Heistand's reply was read
stating he had sent Mr.. McIntyre's letter
to his attorneys. Witness had no other
correspondence with Col. Heistand: all fur
ther negotiations were conducted through
Dudley and Michener.
Mr.. Hawks Recalled.
Mr. Mcintyre was excused, and Mr..
Hawks was recalled and asked whether he
had ever submitted any bill for his services
to Colonel Heistand and he said he had,
and had also sent copy to General Corbin
with letter. The latter was read. 1t ir-
formed the general that he had forwarded
his bill to Colonel Heistand. but that the
latter had made no response and that he,
Hawks, proposed to take legal steps against
the account was not settled.
A copy of a letter from Mr.. Hawks to
Col. Heistand after the latter reached Paris
was read by Senator Cockrelf upbratding
Hawks) had spent his time and money in
behalf Of Heistand's project and telling MIN
that II he did not act more fairly and just
ly, to say nothing Of honorabiy, that the
writer would take steps to get proper
recognition Of his claims regardless Of pub
licity. This copy was admitted after Col.
Heistand had stated that originals of let
ters he received from Hawks had been de-
stroyed by him previous to his departure
from Paris to China. Another letter Of the
same tenor written in January and saying
the friendship of such men as Messrs.
Heistand and Corbin was not worth having
and renewing his declaration Of his inten-
tion to take measures for relief letter
was also read dated January 81 the day
of the settlement. telling Col Heistand
that ''our little matter Is at last settled.
have received $3.50 in cash and promise
Of an appointment as special agent Of the
War Department. l am sorry you did not
treat me fairly before you left New York"
Request Denied.
At the conclusion Of the reading Of the
letters Senator Coekrell said the committee
would dispense with Mr.. Hawks for the
time being unless he had some further
statement he desired to make. =
Mr. Hawks asked that the War Depart
ment be requested to furnish the original
OF letter he had addressed to Secretary
Root in January, 1901.
Senator Cockrell said such letter was
not relevant to the hearing.
Secretary Root has nothing to do with
this" remarked the senator.
Witness then said he would like to pay
his respects to certain parts Of Colonel
Heistand's reply to his charges.
'In the sixth paragraph of the letter writ
ten by him at Pekin. February y. 1901. he
ftor orrixy al in My 10 Uyk q
made a demand upon me for settlement
and wrote him to submit his account for
consideration 1 wish to say I never re-
ceived any such letter from him.
Again he says further in the same
letter My business correspondence with
him was Of hastily written, friendly char
acter. but contained references to persons
and other matters which were thoroughly
understood from conversations fresh In
both our minds I wish to say they were
| thoroughly understood by me In the way T
have shown in my testimony"
Witness then explained how he came to
be in possession of certified copies OF the
correspondence which had been turned over
to Col. Heistand's attorney at the time Of
the settlement. He declared that he had
left the papers in the custody Of Maj. Ed
ward Howard Of the pension office. and
Howard had made the copies. Witness de-
ciared he did not get them until after his
return from the Philippines.
Questioned by the Committee.
Senator Harris thereupon took the wit
ness in hand
'How was it. them" he inquired. that
you wrote Col. Heistand June IL, 1900,
from Manila, as follows: Just what inter-
est you have in the matter. having been
Informed I supposed by your great at
torneys that the matter was settled and
that the original papers had been turned
In. you may feel comparatively safe, but
for your ediffcation beg to inform you
that certified copies Of all correspondence
and photographs Of the most important let
ters We're retained by me and are now in
my possession How do you make your
present statement agree with that letter."
Witness said that while he did not have
the letters In his possession actually, he
had received a letter from his wife while
in the Philippines informing him that Maj.
Howard had given her such letters. Press
ed further witness declared his present
statement was the true one.
II would not have worded that Manila
letter the same way If I had to read 1t
again."
Interrogated about letter he had writ
ten in which he had stated that all persons
named In connection with the hemp COM
pany had withdrawn except one, and being