New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1904-04-05
DENIES LAWS0N'S WORDS
II. III. Rogers Says He Receioed No
$1,000 900 Proposition.

T7o-,o, An-l 4-The plaintiffs in the litigation
growing out Of the consolidation Of the Boston gas
companies closed their case late this afternoon
and when court adjourned the first witness for
-ba defence Was on the stand. Henry II. Rogers.
Of Ne-York was the last witness for the piaintih
1I- Rozers's testimony was interesting inasniuch
as he denied fatty many statements previously
made to the court BY Thomas ". Lawson
Just before the close OF the forenoon session ny
Rogers was recalled and questioned concerning how
far James Phillips who has been s,lbpa1aed as a
witness the case. but who has not been found by
officers Of the court represented him in connection
With transactions involving Thomas w Lawson
Mr.. Rogers said that Mr.. Phillips had not peen
authorized 10 represent him IN dealing with Mr.
Lawson. lie said also that he had nothing 10 do
with Mr. Philipss failure TO appear in court
IN connection with the alleged disappearance OF
Mr. Phillips, Mr.. Whpple told the court that 1t
was supposed that summons had been served on
1Ir. Phillips IN this city February o. and that
a certain clerk st the hotel where Mr.. Phillips had
stayed probably could tell whether personal SER
vice had been made. 1t appeared. however. that
this clerk had gone away vacation, and Mr.
WhpIle had been unable to find him.
Mr.. Rogers was cr0ss-examined by Mr. Beck. OF
his own counsel and in reply 10 questions entered
a general denial ~ all the testimony given in the
could not recall conversations alleged to have taken
place over the telephone on specified oates. thar
read the reports Of Nj. Lawson's testimony IN the
NEWSPAPERS A ol showing teit iilJle SaI4S o..
70 have been made between Mr. Rogers ana Mr.
Lawson was offered as evidence, but an objection
by Mr. WhiPple sustained.
M Rogers said thar he had never received
proposition that Lawson was TO receive $4,000 Tor
withdrawing CqQCsition the gas combination
Concerning the alleged payment OF Si5UV 10 MI.
lawson. Mr.. Rogers was asked: "On what account
'On account OF money sent by Kldder. Peabody
6 Co. Mr.. NinSoT. Que Thomas W LAWSON III
the agreement thar was made with me on March H.
1872 replied Mr. Rogers -.
The witness said that il was not paid on account
any interest he had in copper investment anu
THAI 10 time had he any interest IN the copper
vs-rra as ALLEGED l1y Mr. lawson. After referring
Ia a record book kept his Office. Mr.. Rogers tes-
tf1cG that lie in his Office IN NeW-l ork on
son had asserted. and that the SloG0 payment on
the gas account was made 10 M Lawson III New
~ Rogers testifed that he never had discussed
G iver Mr. lawson he said. had been at his house
only once. The witness declared that he had no IN,
Gas and Coke Company, but DID own a lew sIlaIeSS
IN the Boston companies. He had never received
any compensation trustee for the Della ware CON-
pany Tor anything he had done or leIt unooIle.
Mr. Rogers said he not quite sure OF his ioT-
rner statement that Nr- WinsoT. asked hlm II ne
could reach J. Edward Addicks. IS well as MI
Mr. Burrare." he said may have asked me TO
become Identified with the Tri-Mountaln Consol-
dated Company. The profits were esIimated al
S1.210e01 which. Il was suggested De diNIeeC pc
tween Mr. Lawson ard myself. and to pay COM
mission 10 Kidder. Peabody & Co. I had no inter
est in it, for the scheme did not meet with my
Il this point Mr.. Rogers was excused and coun-
SCI for the plaintiffs announced that their case vas
closed The first witness for me cGieace w.
James l. Richards. president OF the Boston Gas
Cornrarfes who testified that he had taken his
positton at the request Of Robert Wlnsor. The
companies have never paid a dividend since ne Pc
IIr. Richards still on the stand The hearing VIII
be resumed tomorrow morning