Arizona republican., 1910-02-20
PROSECUTION l IF BALL|NGER That Side of the Inquiry Is Almost Completed
 P|nCHOT STILL ID TESTIFY The Unexpected Ending of
 the Cross Examination of
 Glavis- Only Other Wit
 ness Corroborates Certain
 Statements
P|nCHOT STILL 10 TESTIFY

Washington, Feb 19.-The case for the prosecution in the Ballinger-Pin- chot inquiry has practically been which MT. Ballinger is said by Glavis closed. When the committee ad-
 iourned today until Friday. Mir. Brandeis stated that there was some corroborating evidence yet to be produced and that Clifford Pin- chot would probably want to make a statement before he could announce that his case was ended. Mir Pinchot
 was to have taken the stand this after noon. but he could not be found dur
 ing the luncheon recess.
 The days proceedings began with the unexpected announcement that the ross-examination of L. R. Glavis was ended. Henry RI. Hoyt. attorney gen eral for Porto Rico, was called to the
 stand to corroborate that portion of Glavis' testimony in which he told of seeking the advice of Mr. Hoyt in
 Washington in May, 1909, after First Assistant Secretary of the Interior Pierce had rendered a.l opinion which Glsnis thought would permit the Cum ingham claims in Alaska to go to pat eut
 Mir. Hoyt told how deeply worried Glavis seemed to be at this time and said that before going to Attorney Gen eral Wickersham. he and Glavis had discussed the advisability of taking the
 matter up directly with the president. Mr. Hoyt also testified to the good character of Glavis. saying he, had known him for number of years, had told the attorney general that he was an honorable. upright man.
 The only other phase of the case to which MT Hoyt directed his testimony had to do with the Wilson coal cases, in which he acted as special attorney for the United States. Glavis testified that he had heard that the name of R. A. Ballinger. as attorney for some of the Wilson claimants. had been left out of the court record by stipulst ton of counsel MT Hoyt said it WIS at his personal suggestions without the knowledge of MT. Ballinger. that the stipulation had been entered into. As matter of fact, however Mr. Ballin- gers name did appear fifteen or twen- ty times in the testimony given.
 MT. Hoyt said a search had been made for the alleged escrow agreement which Mir Bailinger is said by Glavis to have drawn up and which, accord ing to Glavis. constituted q criminal act, but that it could not be found. The only evidence as to it's existence was iIha formal statement by one of the witnesses. who at the trial. denied the existence of such an agreement
 .Iof of ha 1a taLy up with the introduction of document ary evidence by Brandeis, who read such extracts as he considered of pc culiar interest to the committee These consisted largely of references in the agents reports to conversations or in- terviews with MT. Ballinger as com missioner of the land office. on the subject of the Alaskan claims. This was done, the attorney said, to show that Mr. Balhnger had been actively interested in these cases before he left the land office, and acted as attorney for the said claimants.
 He also read from a statement by H. H. schwartz, chief of the field serv- ice, that it was at MT. Ballinger's di- rection. in January, 1908, that the Cunningham claims were ordered to be Clear listed for patent. This order was withdrawn after Glavis had been notified and had protested.
 MT. Brandeis accompanied the intro duction of the documents with sort of summing up statement in which he said it was claimed that Mir. BaIlin- ger had acted on q favorable report by Special Agent Love. Then he read a letter from Love to Commissioner Den nett, of the land office. in which Love denied that his report of August ?. 1907, favored the clear listing of claims. This report, he said, suggested the ad visibility of further investigation. though previously he had recommend ed clear listing.