New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1902-07-12
BOURKE COCHRAN DARED.
TELLS MR.. LAMB THIEVES ARE BEHIND
HIM
REFEREE SILKMAN - DEFENDANT
AMENDS HIS TESTIMONY.

Theodore II. Silkman, referee, at MS once.
No. II Park Row. under the Supreme Court
order obtained by Mr.. Lamb several weeks ago
for the examination of Mr. Cochran to enable
Mr.. Lamb to frame his complaint in action
which he purposes bringing against Mr. Cock
ran and others to obtain from them compensa-
ton alleged to be due him for his professional
services in opposing the purchase by the Con-
solidated Gas Company of the New-York Eec-
trio Light Heat and Power Company early in
1900 AT the first hearing, on June 49, Mr..
Cochran testified at much length concerning the
litigation, which discontinued in 1901, a
settlement having been effected out of court.
Mr. Lamb yesterday not represented by
counsel He reached Mr. Silkman's office a
little before u o'clock, the hour set for the
animation and at five minutes after Mr..
Cochran arrived, accompanied by Treadwell
Cleveland, his attorney. Around the big table
sat dozen or fifteen reporters. The referee
did not take seat. but walked around the
room during the hearing. Mr.. Cleveland opened
the proceedings.
Mr.. Referee" he said, I'VE here to have
Mr. Cochran sign his deposition. Mr. Cochran
went the minutes and found that In varl-
Gus particulars they needed amendment Those
who have heard Mr.. Cochran know how difficult
it is for a stenographer TO follow him, and most
OF the changes grammatical, making the
construction more smooth. Revised copies were
d
to Mr. Cady. There are two matters of sub
stance which Mr.. Cochran wishes to correct.
IN one place ne Is made to say that at the time
of which he was speaking he did not own stock
in any gas company in New-York City; he
should have said in Manhattan Borough, or in
the old city of New-York. Again. in answer
to a question. Did you appear upon the record
as attorney in person" he said, Yes The
answer should have been, No. Robert J. Fox.
lawyer in my office. appeared for me-
Referee Silkman ruled that Mr.. Cochran
would be allowed to make such corrections a
would not tend to change in substance the in
tent of HIS deposition. but that all other
changes would have to be made by Mr.. Cochran
through the medium Of supplementary exami-
nation.
SIGNS ORIGINAL DEPOSITION.
Mr.. Lamb insisted that great many material
changes had been made by Mr.. Cochran in his
revision. Mr.. Cleveland agreed to make no
amendments except the two already mentioned,
and then Mr.. Cochran pushed forward to the
table and signed his testimony. Mr.. Lamb in
vain brandished the copy returned to him cor
rected by Mr. Cochran.
at don't want that" said the referee ct have
here the official copy. which has been signed by
Mr.. Cochran The examination is closed Mr..
Cochran"
Mr. Lamb held In his hand copy of the origi-
nal deposition, with Mr.. Cockran's correc-
tons written in by hand On some OF the pages
almost every word had been rewritten. and all
through the book Il evident that many
alterations had been made. II these
changes that Mr.. Lamb desired 10 base his
further examination OF Mr.. Cochran, and it was
quickly that by electing to sign his origi-
nal deposition Mr.. Cochran had escaped what
might have been. under the referees ruling a
very trying and disconcerting further examina-
ton. Mr.. Lamb said.
"Mr. Cochran. am not going TO ask you any
question that will tend to incriminate you"
Mr.. Cochran quickly rose to his feet and
glazing at Mr.. Lamb demanded; Mr.. Referee,
are you going to permit such a remark?'
II didn't hear the question" answered Mr.
silkman.
Mr.. Lamb repeated his words, and Mr.. C1eve-
land broke in with. Lamb, what's that you are
saying?
MFR. Lamb. If you please" retorted the young
lawyer
Mr.. Cochran made a remark that it was Mr.
Lambs employers who were responsible for
his statement, and Mr.. Lamb demanded:
do understand, then, Mr. Cochran. that you
refuse to answer any further questions?"
My client will answer any questions which
the referee may rule that he should answer"
said Mr. Cleveland.
Mr.. Cochran was on his way to the door bv
this time. when Mr.. Lamb, rushing toward him.
waving his hand, shouted:
Il dare you to answer my questionsu'
Il don't propose to recognize the tool of the
desperate band OF thieves who employ you"
Mr. Cochran Kissed.
DARES MR.. COCHRAN TO ANSWER
81 dare you to answer the questions" Mr.
Lamb again cried. at the top Of his voice Mr.
Cleveland edged in between his client and Mr..
Lamb. and appealed to the referee.
I'm sorry that I not sitting in court"
said Mr.. Silkman. IF I were I should call the
Sheriff in. but haven't the power"
BY this time Mr.. Cochran had got to the door,
and the turmoil ended with his departure from
the room.
Mr.. Lamb yesterday afternoon undecided
whether to seek 10 reopen the examination of
Mr. Cochran by applying to the Supreme Court
for an order directing him to answer certain
questions or to bring action once; but he
declared that he would adopt one or other of
these courses
The examnat ion of Mr.. Cochran on June 10
was searching one, and it will be remembered
that on the very next day his letter to the Dis
trict Attorney published, suggesting that
that officer proceed against James b. Duke and
Thomas F. Ryan for criminal conspiracy, basing
bis suggestion on certain statements made by
Delaney Nicoll, counsel for the Consolidated
Tobacco Company. of which Messrs. Duke and
Ryan directors, in the course of argument
Susan X. Elmes against that corporation. No
basis for a charge of criminal conspiracy
found by the Acting District Attorney.
The interesting fact was disclosed yesterday
that Charles G. Davis who brought suit the
owner of four hundred shares of American To-
bacco Company common stock against the Con