The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-06-21
WILSON TESTIFIES
SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE IN
 HOLMES TRIAL.
Denies That he Ever Gave Out Any thing From Bureau of Statistics in Advance of Publication
 Date,

Washington, June 2o.-''You are being impeached, Mir. Secretary"
 The head of the department of agri- culture. Secretary Wilson, was on the Worthington was cross examining and the comment was made by special pAos- ecuting attorney Beach.
 Witness Van Riper hadp been asked to stand aside at the beginning of the session today and the secretary had been recalled in order that he might be further questioned concerning news paper interviews in which he had made predictions concerning the crops. He said with reference to some of the statements attributed to him that he could not have made them because they did not indicate real conditions, but he covered most Of the points by saying that while he di1 not remem- Der making the statements accred- ited to any specific time, he had made such assertions openly and publicly and had no disposition to contradict them. MT. Worthington was pressing him relative to an interview attributed to him in Chicago last May concern ing the condition of the crops. You want me to swear to some thing that's not in it," said the dis | tinguished witness.
 NO, Mir. Secretary" responded the
 
 ton for other witnesses"
 It was then that MT. Beach injected his remark. It called forth @ denial and protest from MT. Worthington and for admonition of the bench for MT. Beach for interfering.
 Previous to this occurrence the sec- retary admitted the accuracy of state ments attributed to him in an inter- view prepared for the Associated Press in June, 1905. by MT. Elmer E. Payne, by which the secretary had spoken of the impossibility of leaks from the bureau of statistics. some parts of which he had previously dis | credited. MT. Beach asked only one question on redirect examination.
 Did you ever at any place or at any time give out in advance of the date of official publication anything coming to you through the bureau of statistics?" Never was the emphatic reply.and the secretary was excused.
 Mir Van Riper again took the stand and Mir Worthington proceeded with his cross examination.
 The questions related largely to Van Riper's past history with the obvious intention of impeaching the character of the witness. Van Riper's cross ex- animation was concluded at II o'clock and Mir Beach immediately began his redirect questioning. The redirect examination was very brief and Van Riper was succeeded -on the stand by a number of hotel men and bank off, cfals who testified to uninteresting de- tails involved in the case.
 William V. King, superintendent Of | the New York Cotton Exchange told
 of the election in 1905 of Frederick A, l Peckham as a member of that organl-
 zation. He said that the government
 reports frequently affect the cotton
 market, but that at other times the re-
 port fell perfectly flat.
 | An effort was made on behalf of the | prosecution to secure statement by | MT King of the effect advance infor-
 nation concerning the crop report
 would have on the market, but the l court excluded it as a mere inference. | In reply to MT. Worthington, Mir King said a personal prediction by the Sec
 rotary of Agriculture would not affect
 the market.
 Assistant Secretary Hayes of the
 Department of Agriculture testified
 concerning the preparation of the cot | ton report for June 1905. The report.
 he said, was prepared by Statistician Hyde and Holmes was present as an | adviser The latter, he noticed ad- vocated a general reduction of the
  ous States were canvassed in prepar- ing the final figures. The general re- suit was a compromise, but there were | some reductions.
 Mercer TestIfies.
 L. H. Mercer, New York cottor broker. testified concerning the part
 nership formed between himself and Peokham in 1904. He said that Peck
 ham had supplied s25,oOO capital. He
 knew of no other partners than Peck ham in the firm and when the side agreements between Holmes, Haas, Van Riper and Peckham, relative to their respective interests. were exhibited he
 said he had never before seen them
 Mercer testified to various sums of money paid to Van Riper on account of cotton deals made for him. There
 was one payment of $50,000 in Decem-
 Der, 1904 and another of $40,00O few
 weeks later He said that on one oc- casiou Van Riper had given him ad-
 vance information on the cotton crop
 which afterward he had found to be | approximately correct.
 When MT. Mercer testified that all
 his business was speculative and that
 he had never actually bought or solA | a pound of cotton, the prosecution ob- | jected to the line of inquiry but with l out success. The indictment charges | a combination to buy and sell cotton, ! aaid MT WOrthingtou "and I nrODoaa