New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1905-12-09
DIR. RYAN'S BALK.
Refusal to Ans5cer Questions Re
heated and ErpHcit

The exciting moment of the investigating COM
mittees session. that of Mr.. Ryans refusal 10
testify. followed closely upon Mr.. Hughess an
aiysis of Mr. Ryan's motives and purpose IN
acquiring the Hyde stock. 1t also came uhex-
pectedIy Mr. Hughes asked, apparently WIN
out any suspicion of trouble. if any one had Of
f,red to share the ownership of the stock after
the purchase. Promptly Mr.. Ryan protested
that he ought not to be asked to answer this
and Paul D. Cravath his counsel sustained him.
ITpon Mr.. Hughes's insistence he admitted Ed
ward Hartman had made such an offer the day
after the purchase Nj. Hughes asked why
Mr. Ryan refused the offer
81 didn't want a partner. 1 did not want TO
he hammered in my trustee plans and didnt
want any one who had been connected as dl-
rector in any of the large companies, was the
explicit answer He added that the Hartman
proposal had come before the public announce
ment of the purchase. He further explained
that he told Mr.. Hartman his plans. The next
question produced the scene. The testimony
follows:
Q-what did M Hartman say 10 you to in FLU
ence you to make the sale or 10 divide with MN
c-What did he say TO you to influence you dn 70
2w him t. that the ong6 o be called
to answer that qgestGntG mar M Haprinan
Dwell, you state the substance OIL II, ar.
Mr.. Cravath-I might just say, Mr. Chairman. |
feel bound 10 say to my client, Mr.. Ryan, that,
W6 AZ and ne to his own attitude and plans
unless he chooses voluntarily 10 GO SO De
Hartman or any other had with him in purely
unofficial conversations. Mr.. Ryan is entitled 10
Mr.. HughesE will say that ! deem the matter
the committee may understand the motives which
may actuate those who desire to obtain control OF
| the stock of insurance company, and the pro
| ceedings which may be taken to acquire 1t; and
secondly. that may know whether there is any
truth In
that life Insurance conditions in this State would
Harriman's request. I think that we should have ave-
Ryan will feel that he can do another pubic SER
| vice in advising the committee fully. hr1d
testify as to his motives, %
Mr. HpghesN9 it would not, n9 be snvfbipe
took place and my question was NOT dn9FnpeG ne 20
s sn 1 cg1d G net reca eSscy what said
! the substance of what took place
must be excused.
REFERRED TO COMMITTEE
Hughes viii submit W tRf a ,d h. ssv the e
committee The qnes no s T hm I 10 share in the
purchase? / will put the question in form that hat
witness to state what was said and done IN CON
nection with this nnfiile ID to nv advice Mr.
Ryan, that you are not required as a witness to
! The Charman-Do you advise him in that way
according MF to his best reeoco said
| nd het
to the proposal of Mr.. Hartman TO acquire an In
Mr. Cravaii1sYes. in so far as the question may
cali 1pon the witness 10 state here what was salo
! to him by any other person. that person being
| Mr. Hartman. sir. -. =. II, +,
! The C.hsirman-We are asking now not for his IN
ferences or his opinion but for the fact-what was
| Mr. Crayafh9AIy view is that he is moi required
| as a witness in this inquiry to state what Mr.
Hartman or any other said TO him in private
conversation He will testify freely as TO his owl
| stfifude his own motives and his own purposes.
! The Chairman-Fiave you asked your question
| yer, Mr.. Hughes
Mr.. Hughes-Yes-
Mr. Tuilv-Do you mean by that that the wit
ness should not be any question which should
call for a conversation he might have had with any
nerson relative TO his desire for the purchase 81
| the Equitable stock-as. for instance Mr.. Hyde?
NTr Cravath-That might he rather broad state
rnent aud there certain conversations regard
| Ing which the witness would undoubtedly have No
/ objection TO testifying, but my feeling is tha
! where another had conversation with Mr.
PvaH regarding that stock. any similar subject
! Mr. Ryan ought not to be called upon and can
/ NOT be compelled to testify. here elsewhere
! xyfer direct issue is not involved Where
direct issue that conversation is not involved
| as to statements made by another. attempt II
give the substance of conversations is exceedingly