The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1904-05-21
WITNESS BARRETT
GROWS LOQUACIOUS
UPON THE STAND
Impression Prevails That
He Talked Too
Much.
HIS BOUTS WITH CONRAD
Professional Finesse Seems
to Have Gotten Better
of Judgment.
HIS BOUTS WITH CONRAD

When Harrison ]. Barrett. co-defend-
ant with Gen. James N. Tyner in the
! Postofice Department conspiracy case.
left the witness stand in Criminal Court
| No. 1. at adjournment today. there was
somewhat prevalent opinion that he
had talked too much.
In consequence there seemed a bright
prospect that before he resumes the
stand on Monday morning he will hear
an eloquent dissertation. from his emf
nent and reticent chief counsel. on the
impropriety Of exhibiting loquaciousness
on the witness stand
Tried to Match Conrad.
Throughout his testimony. on cross
| examination today. Barrett was. quite
evidently. Il lawyer first and witness
afterward. His replies indicated desire
! 70 prove equal to Major Conrad as a le-
gal strategist. rather than TO make the
| briefest replies. consistent with ac-
| curacy, and maintain the usual non
cOmbatant attitude of a lay witness.
This was due. OF course. to his eager
ness not T. appear evasive or desirous
of concealing anything. He exhibited
always the utmost willingness to ex-
plain matters, even though the answers
| did not in every case satisfy the Gov
| ernment's special counsel He showed
an entire familiarity with letters, docu-
ments. and facts, and it was probably
/ due to his confidence in this respect
that his responses became argumenta-
/ tive and complex
Several verbal exchanges between the
witness and Major Conrad emphasized
the formers legal frame Of mind. These
| passages were such as constantly occur
/ between the onposing counsel. but not
/ between witness and -cross-examiner. At
/ one time Barrett assured Major Conrad
/ the latter need not caution him as 20
anything he might say.
The Examination.
Witness Barrett today tod n length
OF the custom In vogue. in the terms
| Of office of General Thomas and General
! Tyner, in the issuance OF fr 1u1 orders
! He again described the bond invcst-
ment concerns in some particulars; of
his framing the Barrett opinion and Of
his going into private law practice in
Baltimore. The cross-exam:nltion h.-j
net been concluded. when ai' sUrnn,elt
was taken at noon. oe.luse Of the Sat
Urday half holiday .'egulati1i
General and Mrs. Tyner were not Ia
court today.
Fraud Order Inquiry.
When Judge Pritchard opened court al
1910 O'Clock today Barrett took the
stand ard Major Conrad resumed the
cross-examination. His first question
related to the exclusion Of correspond
ence from the mails by the issuance OF
fraud orders.
| Witness explained a view previously
expressed by him, on direct examination,
in respect to fraudulent use Of the mails
Iby schemes Of an Objectionable nature.
He did not then, or new, believe the
best way TO handle such concerns would
have been to issue a fraud order and
crush the company out Of existence.
The remedy would have been worse
than the disease. in the view Of the wit
ness. since the chief sufferers would
have been the small investors, whose
lmoney had been put into the investment
companies in good faith
A Question of Expediency.
Undoubtedly the Government has the
| legal right to issue such fraud orders
at any time, but 1 doubted its exuedi-
ency." declared the witness.
Witness did not recall any previous
/ opinion similar TO the one ne had pre-
pared The policy Of Judge Thomas,
Tyner's predecessor, had been to permit
a long term of years for companies to
close up lnelT hltl buSllitSS VI Il cllS4tA II
to new certificates.
Major Conrad inquired closely into the
practice of the office under General
Thomas. and witness said there had
been exceptions to the rule Of the office
| Major Conrad did not care to dwell on
! executions. but on the general rule. Mr.
Worthington made an argument to per-
init the witness to explain the eNcep-
tions.
Only Sporadic Cases.
This in turn brought Major Conrad to
his feet. and he said:
1T does not disprove a fixed rule by
showing sporadic cases in which the
rule was not closely followed l have
asked the witness TO point out any
official declaration Of Judge Thomas.
dlsproving the custom l have stated as
the prevailing one OF that office"
! The court expressed the view that the
witness should explain to what extent
the exceptions occurred.
While a juror was called out 10 answer
1 a telephone call witness got from his
file Of duplicates of official papers a
letter bearing on a decision of Attorney
General Harmon in this matter. The
letter was read.
Major Conrad thought the witness had
thrown no new light on the matter and
insisted on the production of any possl-
BILE evidence that the rule OF procedure
mad been revoked or altered in any ma
terial view.
Witness reply did not satisfy the
Government counsel and the inquiry
| proceeded TO another matter
| Counsel inquired what witness meant
by saying the companies could bring
Continued on Second Page)