East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current, 1905-02-13

I matter. and all fees so earned by him
shah be his individual property and
the firm shall have no interest there
in, and said John H. Mitchell shall
not be required to perform any serv-
ices therein except such as he might
properly do as senator in congress for
any constituent without charge.
In answer to questions by Mr.. He
ney, Judge Turner continued, in ex.
PLANTATION of why the contract was
amended:
II will tell you the circumstances
and you can draw your own conclu-
sions from that When Mr.. Mitchell
was out here he looked over the con-
tract. We had a contract, but of
course this is not the one; we looked
that over and there was a clause in
1t that he thought ought to be chang
ed, and he told me to fix 1t; and
did draw up this writing here, chang
ing the particular clause that he
thought would be dangerous for him;
and we signed it. At the time that
was done 1 said to him, Now, Mr..
Robertson is the only man on earth
except you and me that knows to the
contrary anything about this agree
ment, and Mr.. Robertson will have
to corroborate this thing. OF course,
1t may get US into trouble, He said
that he would see what he could do
with Robertson, or something of that
kind. And the agreement was left
with me in that shape. have never
had any correspondence or any words
with the senator about it since he left
here. This contract is an exact COPY
of the partnership agreement that
was signed at this date, March 5,
1901, except as to that clause about
the departmental business. That is
the one we changed. In all other re-
spects it is the same as the real con-
tract that was signed"
Have you the original or an orig
inal of the first contract?" the wit
ness was asked, and he replied that
he had.
And you will produce that, will
you?' was the next question of the
government attorney
Judge Tanner handed the paper to
Mr. Heney
THAT is it," he said. "a little later
supplemental agreement was made
that does not affect the question you
are asking. but it simply changes the
division of the fee, giving me three
tifths and the senator two-fifths."
Judge Tanner also testified to the
genuineness of the letter printed be-
low in full.
Mitchell Suggests Testimony.
The letter herewith reproduced is
one which was sent by Senator Nit
chell to his law partner Judge A. H.
Tanner, by Harry C. Robertson, pri-
vate secretary to the senator. when
Robertson started to Portland in
answer to the subpoena of the gov
ernment
The letter is priced by the govern
ment as very strong evidence, in
fact, as a proclamation of the guilt of
Senator Mitchell by himself, not in
that it makes any direct statements
of guilt. but on account of the evil
dent intent of the letter to instruct
and lead the testimony of Judge Tan
ner, should he be called again before
the grand jury.
1t is taken as an admission of guilt |
bY the senator also, inasmuch as it |
shows a desire to get aawy from the |
terms of the first co-partnership |
agreement, in stating that he had no |
interest in any departmental business
whatsoever Also significant is its |
statement that the senator had no |
knowledge of any money having been |
paid to him by Kribs when in fact |
the account was, according to Tan
ner's testimony, sent to him each
month as per agreement.
The letter will be used against SEN
ator Mitchell when he comes to trial
on the charge of violating section 1882
of the Revised Statutes of the United
States, which provides that no one
holding the office of United States
senator shall receive any compensa-
tion whatsoever for any work done
to further matters relating to the
work of the government in any de-
partment. Senator Mitchell was in
dicted on this charge February 1 for
receiving fees from Frederick A.
Kribs for eXpediting 20 timber claims
Burn This Without Fail"
For the sake of clarity the letter is
as follows:
WASHINGTON. D. c., Feb. 8, 1905.
My Dear Judge
am almost afraid to write a word
as these scoundrels will misconstrue
everything and distort all that is
said Your friend with letter did not