The Birmingham age-herald., 1906-02-02
Cannot Remember Many Details
 of His Business
QUESTIONS FIRED AT HIM
Witness Appears Nervous, But Speaks Quietly and Considers Answers Carefully Before Making
 Them.


 Them.
 Chicago February 1.-rhe cross -exami- nation of Edward F. Swift occupied al most the entire day in the packers trial. District Attorney Morrison delivered his questions with the speed of a rapid fire gun. but did not succeed al any time iE embarrassing the witness, who eonsid- cred his replies before making them.
 The witness declared positively that Commissioner Garfield was given all the information he asked for, but several times admitted that he could not tell whether certain specific information had been given to the government or not. MT, Swift testified that he did not know whether or not he was @ stoekholder in the Kenwood company, one of the con eerns which the government declares was formed by the packers to enable them to control the output of by-prodnets.
 His attorneys asserted that the Kenwood company was not in business at the time mentioned by District Attorney Morri- son and the district attorney declared with much energy that he would show during the trial that the Kenwood com pany was in operation at the time the indictment against the packers was re- turned. Other witnesses were Louis k. Swift president of Swift & Co.,, and Jesse P Lyman of Boston, former president of the National Packing company The tes- timony of both was unimportant. MT. T f,a ata nd x4Fha adjourned for the day Fires Question at Swift. The first question by the district att torney to MT. Swift was:
 Why were you opposed to this inves- | tigation2"
 Hike any large or small business house, we did not care to be obliged to give up our processes
 "There were no processes to be given out, were there? "Yes, they could learn how tallow and fat are converted into oeo oil'
 They simply made an investigation of your books. did they not?" "They did that and more' What more did they do?"
 Looked at papers too" What papers did they examiner
 "I don't know all the papers in my of 1 fee"
 Then you don't know whether they l examined the papers or not?' ] Well, Garfield came here to do that 1 thing, and he had the power
 Was 1t not In your presence that a refusal was made to furnish information regarding hogs and sheepY "I don't know of that
 Does the Garfield report show any thing about the slaughtering of hogs | or sheep?'
 ''I don't know what the report shows.
 Did you not refuse to give informa- ton regarding hogs and sheep because it was not called for in the Martin reso- lution?"
 "I don't think I did"
 Did you not refuse to disclose the l names of the members of your family 1 holding stock in your company
 "I am not sure of that
 Did your company ever furnish any information concerning private cars own ed by the National Packing company" "Yes, I told MT Durant the number of our cars"
 Did you refer him to your counsel 1 on questions regarding the stock you owned in other companies?'
 "I believe SO"
 "At meeting on April 29 there was a general discussion. was there not, on 1 Yes"
 "As result of that meeting it was practically agreed was 1t not what you would give out?"
 NO sir"
 Witness Appeared Nervous.
 MT. Swift seemed nervous under the rapid fire of questions.
 He clasped and uncasped his hands constantly and many times rubbed hls face with his fingers. He spoke quietly, l however, and his answers were evidently 1 well considered before they were given. 1 Attorney Morrison then presented one l of the Garfield acquisitions and asked l MT Swift If he received fl after the meeting and if 1t was not the sub stance of an agreement between MT. Durand and Swift & Co. The witness said
 "I never made an agreement with MT. 1 Durand'
 '.That does not answer my question" DO yon mean to say that your com pany made no agreementy .sYes. we yielded everything he wanted.
 "Did you furnish the information about the National Packing company
 "I am not an officer of the National Packing company That can take care of l itself"
 You are stockhoIder in the National | are you not 2'
 Attorney Hynes for MT. Swift objected l hut the court directed the witness to answer His reply was:
 "Yes, I was
 You are now and was then director. l were you notY
 same objection" said MT, Hynes.
 same ruling" said the court.
 "Yes. I ann
 Could Not Remember. 1 The witness was then asked if he had l not refused to tell Mfr. Durand of his l holding of stocks in other companies and l replied that he could not remember the l limitation of MT. Durand's request.
 Were you not asked at this meeting about arbitrary values of fat and hidesY' l q don't remember. 1 "Did you ever give him any information | about your holdings in the National Pack | ing company" T would not say l did, or did not" | Any information about holdings in the | Oppenheimer company" l Same answer"
 Any information about dressed beefY' | Same answer
 Were you interested in the Kenwood company"
 Attorney Hynes objected strenuously 10 I