The sun., 1910-05-27

replied the witness. Bryant. u seBms.
had kept a httls book In which he made
memoranda Of the papers IN HE custody.
On this book appeared Destroyed BY
order q &, r. n. Technical statements
/ 1908. March ., iBno.-
Arthur p WOllAm, another clerk In
Heike's Ofioe. said that in Deoemher
ipoo. Mr. Heike had handed him q similar
package oi technical statements for the
year ions for an reilneries and had told
him 10 destroy them. On cruaa-eEami-
nation Mr. Stanchheld got the witness
10 admit that IL Naa the custom 20 destroy
such Statements after they had been
kept a year
Soms of Heike's fifteen thousand
letter books we're Identified by another
clerk. William D. Foster Mr. SlAnch-
field. for Heike. wanted 20 know Of Foster
II Heike asn't known a. the letter writer
of the company. He was = very prolific
letter writer. replied the witness
A succession Of letters was read by the
Government attorneys from these books.
the object being 20 show the close track
Mr.. heike Kept % the figures from all
redneries and every dstail Ol that end Of
the business. Most Oi the letters were
addressed 70 the superintendents u re-
hneries. Many Of them were hlled with
complaints that more sugar wasn't
being turned out In one letter adj
dressed 10 Mr. MitherSpOOn In October
0. io0a. Mr.. Heike said that ha had received
letter from Mr. WitherapOOn In which
the latter Said that he had been unable
10 comprehend the instructions coming
from the Office and asked that there be no
cOnfusiOn betW cen Mr. HavemeyeF's in
structions and those ~ Mr. Heike. To
this Mr.. Heike replied:
The bookkeeping % the company
involves details IN which Mr. HAvemeyer
i- not Interested. bat he IL Interested IN
results
Another letter declared that the actual
loss by shrinkage on Java cargOes of sugar
should not be over per cent This letter
Was introduced evidentlv with the purpose
Of upsetting any contention that the
difference IN weight was due 10 shrinkage,
statement which has been made Al
the letters we're read over the objection
Of Mr.. Stanchfeld for Heike and Of the
lawyers for Gerbracht in those cases In
which tho letters referred % that defen-
dani
IN the case Of the charts show ing tho
output % the refineries Mr. Sianchheld
raised the objection that u vas intended
a. a picture Ol quilt hich could only
have been known 70 Heike u az all by
figures Of a very complicated nature
The Introduction og such a chart de-
scribed ~ graphic by Heike's lawyers
was declared 10 be- wholly unfair to that
defendant The defence made the point
that " the Jurors were 90 reach a CON
cluNion unfavOrable To Heike they ought
10 do V from the fglres themselves with
out any such aids. The Government
said that similar charts have been intro
duced IN other criminal Gases. To decide
the point Judge Martin took a recpss for
a lew minutes. When he resumed he
announced that after consultation with an
associate he had decided to admit the
Government exhibits.
lhe Government announced 81 the end
of Yesterdays seesiJn that Il had only a
very lew more Witnesses 20 call and would
caose its case this morning.
James q. Brzezinaki the former special
employee Of the Treasury Department.
indicted Tor perjury in the sugar under
weighing cases. found ts O0O hail yesterday
and was released from the Tonibs.