The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-03-03
MIR. CROMWELL
 IS INSULTING Chafes Under Questions of MT. Morgan. THE SENATOR REMAINS CALM Taliaferro Resents the Impotence
 of the Witness. The Committee, in Executive Session, win Consider the Matter of Com-
 polling Answers 10 the
 Question.
THE SENATOR REMAINS CALM


 by Senator Morgan today in the ex- animation of Mir. Cromwell before the Senate committee on interoceanic ca~ nals. The period covered by the letter was when the Panama Canal company was seeking prolongatfon of it's con- sessions in the tsthmus. The letter re- ferred to an inclosure, and Mir Crom- well repeatedly declined to state the nature of the inclosure or to discuss the correspondence in any manner. Ex- traordinary political conditions In Bo- gotta were referred to fn the letter and Mir. Morgan asked concerning this ref erence and when the witness declined to discuss 1t the senator asked wheth- CT the witness felt inclined that he was compelled to conceal any action that was in the interest of the Unified States.
 T refuse to answer such hypothet- ical and imperinent questions" said MT. Cromwell.
 T am compelled by the attitude of this committee to accept your unusual and indecent replies replied Mir Nor gan.
 They are no more unusual or inde- cent than your questions.' asserted the witness.
 Senator Talioferro interrupted and demanded to know wherein the ques- 
 said the indecency was in the assump- tion that he had been employed to do anything against the interests of the United States. Mir Talfaferro then de- manded that the witness be instructed not to make insulting replies.
 Even Willard Feels It.
 Chairman Willard said he thought the character of the reply by the wit ness was uncalled for and Senator Kit s..fdon ~.mxaHfaH thar afseRff0pE should be couched is different Ian guage. sThis Is not the first time I have noticed an inclination on the part of the witness to insult the interroga- fors,y said kr. Ta1iaferro.
 The colloquy between the members Of the committee was brought to a close by MT. Morgan. who said he en- tertained no3 resentment of insults from the witness. that he had too much seif-respect for that. He counselled his colleagues not to concern them- selves in his behalf.
 In resuming the examination, Mir. Morgan reviewed the testimony of the secretary of the Panama Canal Com pany before the canal committee four years ago, discussing the desire of the company to surrender the canal project to the United States. Mir. Cromwell refused to testify on this subject, talk ing shelter behind his professional re- lations to the company.
 As MT Morgan construed the testi- mony of the secretary, MT. Lampre, he said the company planned to take the canal project out of the reach of Co., Iombia and Americanize 1t. Mir. Crom- well refused to answer any questions on the subject, but MT Morgan pursued the inquiry. asking the witness if he had not himself drawn the plan.
 Again the Senator asked MT. Crom- we'll is he had not shown this plan to a number of persons. MT. Cromwell said he had outlined different plan to the Rivers and Harbors Committee of the House, but he refused to state the difference between the Lampre scheme and that submitted to the House Com mittee.
 TalIaferrO Appeals to Chair.
 MT. Taliafero appealed to the chair to know whether the witness could re- fer to the plan offered to the House Committee and then refuse to explain its provisions on the ground that pro fessionai secrets were involved. Mir. Cromwell said the document would speak for itself. but MT. Tahafero in sisted that the witness should not dic- tate the manner in which the committee gets its information.
 After a considerable discussion by the committee the witness outlined House committee plan briefly. It was deter mined that the question of compelling the witness to answer should be con sidered by the committee at an execu- tive session.
 MT. Morgan then had read the man ifesto of the Liberal party in Colom- bia dated April 20, 1900, precipitating the civil war that resulted from diff ference of policy between two factions in that republic. Several questions were asked concerning that period to which the witness replied that he sup posed the senator was stating theoreti- cal facts.
 Mir. Morgan said the date of the manifesto is April 20. 1900. That was the date or about the date when the money was paid by the Panama Canal Company for the concession from 1904 to 1910?"
 Senator Kittridge objected to the question on the ground that it was not pertinent to the inquiry and after discussion it was agreed that the pertinency of the question should be determined at an executive session of the committee tomorrow.
 During the controversy MT. Morgan said that he did not propose to give the witness the benefit of his purpose in asking the questions. and finally
  here for some purpose that I do not understand and I propose to get to the bottom of 1t"
 MT. Cromwell said he had come at the invitation of the committee.
 Not by my invitation" said Mir. Morgan.
 MT. MIIIard's Memory.
 Chairman Willard said he thought this matter ought to be understood and asked Mir Morgan if he did not recall that he (the chairman), had asked MT. Morgan if he did not think that Mir Cromwell should be subponaed and he (Mr. Morgan), had said in re- ply: T do not want him subpoenaed, but think he has been written to and asked to appear"
 Mir. Morgan said his answer was that he did not object to writing Mir. Cromwell to come.
 Throughout the examination of MT. today, Mir. Morgan kept close to the civil war in Colombia which was the forerunner of the organiza- tion of the Panama Republic. He ap- peared to be trying to connect Mir.