Omaha daily bee., 1906-02-07
Says One sentenos in Presidents Eote
About Case Has Been Changed.
STATEMENT CREATES 4 SENSATION
Attorneys for Defense Object to Natter
being Brought Before Jury.
c HFIslo REPORT IN EVIDENCE
rr. Miller, for the Packers, Begins
Reading Book of Three Hundred
and Fifty Pages 60
the Jury.

louoy In the trial OF the packers case.
At the opening OF court he was called
upon BY Attorney John s. Miller, who
represents Armour d Co. to produce the
original copy of a letter written to him
by President Roosevelt, or TO admit tho
authenticity OF copy which Mr.. Miller
produced In court
Tho attorney general admitted the ac-
curacy OF the document AS a copy, but
declared the clause in the letter which
the attorneys of the packers construed as
meaning that the department of justice
and the department OF commerce and labor
were working on the case in unison was
not correct. His assertion caused much
excitement among the attorneys for the
packers and .hey objected to the state
ment as being improper before the jury.
The letter was not offered in evidence, but
was marked for Identification. But three
witnesses were on the stand during the
day. and their evidence was not of general
interest, relating as II did, entirely to the
manner In which the agents of the gov
crnment examined the books of Nelson
Morris a. Co. and the Fairbank Canning
company.
The afternoon session OF the court was
taken up by the reading to the court OF
the Garfield report on the packing in
Attorney General Moody called.
Attorney General Moody was today
called ON by the attorneys for the packers
10 admit the authenticity of a letter writ
ten to him by President Roosevelt, in
which It was plainly stated that the
Department OF Justice and the Department
OF Commerce were working together in
the packers case and with the permission
of the president or to produce the original
of the document.
The attorney general declared that he
would admit the authenticity of the letter.
subject to it's verihcation by j. A. Kratz,
his private secretary. The letter. as pro-
! duced In court by the attorneys for the
-paeneis. rar u ,oi,y -ofs tIie original docu-
nient as II appeared in a published account
Of the proceedings of the senate.
The attorney general read the letter and
then to his feet. IF II pleases the
court" he said, II feel II my duty upon
reading this letter to say in regard to this
sentence which IL contains, with my
permission, the department of justice and
the department OF commerce and labor.
is not correct"
All the lawyers for the packers to
their feet at the words of the attorney
general, several of them addressing the
court excitedly II would like TO finish
said the attorney general
Document Not In Evidence.
~ understand that the attorney gen
eral merely assented to the authenticity
vi the document, said Judge Humphrey
Attorney Miller. for the packers. who
niaue the request of the attorney general
To admit the accuracy of the document
uid not introduce 1t in evidence but had
It nsrkeu for identification.
Tho examination OF e. NJ. McFar-
lane was then resumed by District Attor-
ney Morrison. The questioning was di
reeted toward the subsidiary companies
which. IL is claimed by the government
were the medium through which the con
troll of prices on all products was effected
air. McFarlanc said that he had beer
Iaesent al meeting of the directors o
the oppenheimer company as representa-
1.-Two OF one of the casing men of the Fair
hank Canning company.
ibid that man represent the Morises? p
IL don't know. l have been there fo
twenty years. but | don't know anything
about IT,"
The witness declared that tho governmen
agents examined the hooks OF the Actin;
Trading company and the Kcnwood com
pany. hut said that he knew little abou
The operations Of the subsidiary companies
AZ tho conclusion of the cross-examina
tion the attorneys for the packers at
tempted 10 prove the accuracy of tn
books by Mr. McFarlane, hut met oh
iections from the district attorney
Darius y. Knight, chief clerk of tn
figuring department of the Fairbank Can
ming company, was called to the stand
The greater part of his testimony wa
similar to that of the preceding witness
Mr. McFarlane.
The direct examination of Mr. Knigh
was brief and he was not cross-examine
by the government Harry A. Timmons
chief accountant for the Fairbank Can
ming company followed Knight on tn
stand. and his testimony did not diffe
materially from that offered by McFarlan
and knight. At the conclusion of Tim
mons evidence Attorney Miller asked per
mission 10 offer In evidence for the pack
ers the Garfield report of March s. 1906, o
the beef industry. No objection wa
Offered and Mr.. Miller commenced to rea
the report which contains $50 pages.
"Aro you going TO read the entire book ?
asked the court.
II 50 desire" replied Mr.. Miller IL
might as well be now as at any time"
well. YOU might as well sit down Will
you read" replied the court
The entire afternoon was occupied b
the reading Of the report.