Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1905-07-29
Pe e lhl and Haas to
Answer TO the Courts
For Refusal to Give Testimony
About Cotton Crop Report.
Haas Refused to Be Suora---Aaswsrs Might
Have Incrininaied Themselves. mi

Washington. July 2s.-The refusal.
yesterday, of F. A. Peckham, a New
York broker, to answer questions be-
fore the grand jury engaged in the in
vestigation of Irregularities connected
with the cotton crop report Of the de.
partment Of agriculture was, today.
brought to the attention of Judge
Wright Of the criminal court, but the
hearing in the case vas postponed un-
til Saturday morning. Similar action
was taken in the case of Moses Haas,
who was also before the jury, yester-
day, as witness and refused to testify.
The original presentation was made
was made to the court at II o'clock and
thereupon an order was issued requir-
ing Haas to appear ut $50 p. m. Ito
show cause, if any he has, why he
should not answer the questions certi-
fed by the grand jury as being pro.
pounded to him and as to which he re.
fused to make answers .--.--
Messrs. Peckham and Haas We're re.
ported by their New York lawyer.
Marcus Alter, and A. A. Bierney Of the
local bar. They made a plea for time
to make preparations and were given
until 10 o'clock, Monday next, when
each side will be given an hour. Both
the defendants were allowed to depart
upon their own recognizance. Haas
is alleged to have been the inter-
mediary between Holmes and New
York brokers.
The proceedings in the grand jury
room throw light upon several points
concerning which but little has so far
been authoritatively stated. Mr.. Beach
is shown to have said that SO far the
proceedings are directed only against
Former Associate Statistician E. 8.
Holmes and that he is relying upon
Section 5451, of the Revised Statutes,
as the law under which he is conduct
ing the inquiry. That statute prohibits
the bribery of government employees
and imposes as a penalty imprison-
ment for not more than three years
and fine not exceeding three times the
amount of the bride. F @-ia'i
The record also indicates that Haas
declined at first even to be swor1 !, say
ing that before he would consent he
must know the purpose of the proceei-
ings and the names of the parties
against whom it is directed in order
that he might consult counsel as to
whether the jury has right to proceed
in the matter. For all 1 know" said
Mr.. Haas, Il may be the person, or
one of the persons against whom this
inquiry is directed"
Replying to Mr.. Hass, the district at.
torney said that while 1t was necessary
it was deemed net improper to advise
the witness that there was pending be-
fore the grand jury an inquiry as to the
alleged criminal conduct of Holmes.
Without conceding any right of the wit
ness to inquire into the deliberations OF
the grand jury, the district attorney told
Mr.. HaSs that the information was
given to whatever he sought to make
out of it. at the same time, advising
him that any collateral inquiry to the
grand jury may make a rising out of
this investigation will be made by the
present grand jury. The witness said
the district attorney. had the right to
refuse to answer questions tending to
inc:iminate him. go 81
After further protest, Mr.. Hass was at
las sworn. whereupon, he said that II
giving his name and residence, he
would sly nothing more because his
answer might tend to incrimin1te him.