Jefferson jimplecute. (Jefferson, Tex.) 1907-1926, 1907-02-15
HENRY EXAMINED.
Congressman Testified Before the

Congressman Testified Before the In
vestisation Committees Monday.
was the first witness Monday before
the Bailey investigation committees.
He stated he had been a member of
congress for ten years. He was part
ner of Stribling from March, 1895. until
his election In 1896. He said Henry &
Stribling were connected with the Wa,
ters-Pierce penalty suits. He said he
was assistant attorney general under
the Hogg administration, and while he
was living In Texarkana he was direct
ed to go to Waco and investigate al
legged violations of the antitrust laws.
He said he conferred with the grand
jury, which decided to indict about
nine Standard and Waters-Pierce Off
cials. He resigned as assistant attor-
ney general and moved to Waco. At
that time Taylor was county attorney.
Taylor agreed to bring suit against the
Waters-Pierce company and turned the
proceedings over to Henry & Stribling
to handle the matter on division of
fees. Witness stated hard work was
required to get up the evidence. I'VE
continued in the case until we were
invited out of 1t by County Attorney
c. M. Thomas" said Henry. THAT
was the last day of October, 1900"
Henry said he agreed with Thomas
that criminal indictments against
Pierce should not be dismissed. This
ended the conference. The witness
| said he had read over testimony Of c.
| F. Thomas that the latter objected to
the fee of $4,000 for Henry & Stribling.
Henry stated emphatically that he
never knew of him Directing to the
fee until Thomas issued a newspaper
state Aug. 8, 1900, about ninety-flve
days after the conference. He said
this Thomas statement severed their
| personal relations. Henry had a letter
| of Oct. 10, 1900, to Henry & Stribling
| from Cullen F. Thomas, which was read
by the clerk. This letter asked Henry
& Stribling to withdraw from the case
and offered to compromise on the fee.
Thomas believed that they could not
successfully continue the case because
VI cSIiouSSQ T6ldllOuS.
Henry read the letter Of reply to
Thomas in which they declined the
offer Of Thomassand preferred to con-
tinue In the case under the old con-
tract. Witness stated they proceeded
to get ready to try the case and worked
overtime. He said that Thomas tried
to confer with him over the telephone
and he (Henry) refused to talk to him.
He said friend Of Thomas tried to in.
tercede, but they refused to stack
arms" When the case came to trial
In October, 1900. Thomas appeared In
court and Henry & Stribling promptly
withdrew, leaving the courthouse.
Henry read q newspaper letter by
George Clark in which the writer said
the only obstacle in the way of set
tlemsnt was the criminal indictment
against Pierce, which Thomas refused
to withdraw.
Henry denied emphatically that he
had parted IN anger with Thomas at
tho Pacific hotel. Witness declared he
knew nothing of the $500 draft or
the u 800 voucher. He had read about
them In the papers and said he wrote a
statement to the newspapers to this
effect. Il wish to say that never re-
ceived any money from Pierce, the
Waters-Pierce Oil company or any at
torney or agent" said Henry.
Witness said letter to him from
Clark. In which the writer said that
In his opinion the letters supposed to
be from ]. D. Johnson read by Thomas
IN the congressional campaign, were
forgeries. Clark exonerated Henry in
this letter and asserted that If the let
tiers were genuine they were stolen and
Thomas knew they had been stolen.
Witness also read a letter from j. D.
Johnson of Aug. Is, 1902, in which
johnson stated that he had never Of.
Tered to pay Henry or Stribling any
sum Of money for the dismissal Of the
cases.
Henry was permitted to go over the
Thomas testimony, which had been
prepared in typewriter form. He de.
MED that he said to Thomas: "You
do not think we are dishonest. do
your" and Thomas reply, 81 don't"
This conversation, he said, never took
place at the Pacific hotel.
Henry said that on April % prima.
r1es for congress were held in Lime.
stone county and his opponent was T.
s. Henderson. He said he was on his
way to Bell county April 20, 1900, when
he went to see Stribling, who was sick
In bed, Stribling showed a telegram
from abbey asking him (Stribling) to
meet him at Hillsboro. Henry met
Bailey and was told about his interest
In the affair. Bailey was anxious to
hel phis friend Francis. Bailey stated
Pierce wanted to thorw up his hands
and obey the laws of Texas. Henry
said he was unwilling to take any part
In compromise until he was in the
presence OF the district Judge and
county attorney. Henry insisted that
II compromise was reached he want.
ed 1t given to the public Trough the
pres, and he said Pierce Vas willing
to compromise for $4,000.
Henry told OF a conference with
Pierce in which Bailey was there a
good deal of the time" He said that
In the conference District Judge Scott
spoke up and said: "Ten thousand
dollars for the state and s., 900 for Hen.
ry & Stribling would be good settle
ment. You know there may be a ques.
ton Of abatement since the old com.
pany has dissolved"
On q question from Cooke Mr.. Hen
~ said that the conference was held
on April 80. 1900. by Henry, Stribling
Scott. Bailey and others. Henry was
emphatic about this conference, not
withstanding 9 statement to the con
trary. He said Bailey got off a regu
lar Pullman sleeping car and did moi
think 1t was private car. During his
testimony Henry said: "Mr. Bailey
told me that Mr.. Pierce would be will
ing to make satisfactory settlement oil
the suits. and replied that such q
course would be entirely satisfactory
If the terms Of the settlement could be
agreed upon by all parties concerned
Henry said he was surprised and i'm
pressed when Pierce came to Waco, be
cause he had tried hard to get hin
through requisition from Governor
Stone OF Missouri and that official hat
turned down the requisition.
In reply to a question Of Cooke the
witness stated that Bailey was the frs
man to mention to propose a compro
mise Of the suits.
June II. is and 10 is the dat