Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1907-04-13
HARTMAN SAYS He
WROTE THE LETTER
He Testifies About the Famous
"Where Do Stand"
TOLD ONE MAN ABOUT 1T
But tile Financier Declines to Make
Public His Name.
HE rs SILENT ABOUT SHERMAN
Would Not Answer Any Question
Abont the Representative Part
in the Affair.
HE rs SILENT ABOUT SHERMAN


special bSi;atch TO The Star
NEW YORK, April Backward H. Har-
rman appeared in the Tombs police court
this morning as a witness against Frank
w. HILL his former stenographer, who Is
accused of having caused the publication
of famous Where do l Stand?" letter
written by Mr. Hartman to Mr. Sidney
Webster
The actual complainant was Alexander
Millar the secretary of the Union Pacific
Railroad Company. The hearing was held
in the private examination room, and Magis-
trate Wahe presided.
Hills counsel asked that the complaint be
dismissed on the ground that it should have
been made by Mr.. Hartman himself, but
he was overruled. Mr.. Hartman and Judge
Lovett general counsel for The Union Pa
cfc railroad, sat side by side on the magis-
trates left.
S. B Rank, da city editor of a New York
morning newspaper, was the first witness.
He was examined by Paul Krotel, assistant
district attorney. He described the defend
ant Frank 3. Hills visit to the Office of his
newspaper. Mr.. Rank said that Hin had
read to him some notes of a letter which he
had ir his possession. Former Magistrate
Ommen, who appeared for Hill. objected
when Rank was asked if these notes were
in substance the Sidney Webster letter
which was afterward published.
Could Not Repeat Them.
But Mr.. Rank was allowed TO repeat the
substance of the notes he remembered
it. He also said Hill offered to sell them.
Hill told TO return the next day, and
he did so. Hill, said Rank, crfered TO make
transcript of the notes. When he re-
turned the next day. said the witness, he
had partial transcript of the notes in his
possession.
Walter l.. Rathbone, an attorney, fol-
lowed Mr.. Rank He testified that he had
been summoned to the newspaper office
and had heard the note read by Hill. He
identified the copy of an affidavit which
Hill had made.
Mr.. Hartman was then called. After
testifying that Hill was not in his employ
on March Z, 1907, he identified copy
of the Sidney Webster letter and admitted
that he had written it. Mr.. Hartman said
that the letter as published in the news
papers had evidently been transcribed from
old stenographic notes, but that the form
the exact copy only In an immaterial word
or phrase.
Mr.. Hartman denied that he had ever
authorized the publication of the letter.
nor had he authorized Hill to make a
transcript from his notes and publish 1t.
Mr. Hartman then compared the exact
copy with the copy as published in the
public press. The discrepancies were only
slight
did you ever communicate the contents
of this letter to any one outside your Of .
fice?" aksed Mr.. Krotel.
Il did-to other man. That was
some time after the letter was written
The Objections Sustained.
"Who was the other man." asked Mr..
Ommen in cross-examination.
Il object to that said Mr.. Hartman.
But" contended Mr.. Ommen, that man
might have been the editor of the paper
which first published the letter"
Mr.. Ommen argued that by giving tho
letter out to person. Mr.. Hartman
had precluded himself from bringing any
poceedings against his client. He said that
to communicate the contents TO a third
party equivalent to publishing it.
This construction of the law was dis
puted by the magistrate.
THE only issue in the case is whether
this defendant took the notes, and had the
right to take them and sell them," said
the magistrate.
Did you read the letter to Representa-
tive Sherman" persisted Mr.. Ommen.
Il object to that" said Mr.. Krotel.
The objection was sustained.
Then Mr.. Ommen asked in turn whether
Mr.. Hartman had read the letter to Sem
ator Depew, Benjamin B. Odell and James
Hazen Hyde.
To all these questions Mr. Hartman re-
fused to answer. and his refusal was sus-
tanned by the magistrate.
The Webster letter. Mr.. Hartman said
he thuoght he had dictated to Alexander
Millar. He said that he had been much
more accustomed to debating his corre-
spondence to Mr.. Millar than to Hill.
Mr.. Hartman was then excused and left
the room with Judge Lovett.
Mr.. Millar's Testimony.
Alexander MiIlar was next called He
said he could not recall whether the Web
ster letter had been dictated to him by
Mr. Hartman. But he positively identified
the transcript of the letter. which was in
evidence as being Hills handwriting. with
which Mr.. Millar said that he was perfectly
Mr.. Millar's qualifications Judge Of
Hills handwriting Mr. Ommen endeavored
to impugn. He said that Mr.. Miliar had
really to qualify as an expert in this re-
gard He tried to show that the Union
Pacific's secretary had ready seen Hills
writing in long hand. But the witness as
serted that he was nearly as familiar with
Hills chirography as his own.
Wasn't this letter important enough for
YOU to remember whether Ii dictated
to you or not, Mr. Millar?" asked Mr.. Om-
men.
.'It was important of course but II was
only one of hundred things which 1 was
doing every day."
Mr.. Millar was certain that after Mr..