New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-03-05
PINCHOT WEAKENS
R4SING CHARGES ON
SUSPICION.
AdmstS He Has No Personal
Knoscledge of Wrongdoing
by Ballinger.
TFrom The Tribune Rureau.l

u
Washington. March 4.z-The PRINCIPAL de-
to-day was a further confirmation of the
fact that Clifford Pinchot, former Chief
Forester, is seeking to make out his case
against Secretary Ballinger on the same
kind Of evidence that was furnished by
Louis r. CLAWS. The latter was unable
to give positive and direct testimony of
wrongdoinS OF which he had personal
knowledge and sought TO prove his charges
by a sequence OF events. deductions. al
legged suspicious circumstances. etc. When
Mr. Pinchot took the stand he prefaced
his testimony with statement in which
he promised 10 prove certain specific
charges against the Secretary of the In
.erior. Among other things. he said he
would show that Mr.. Ballinger had made
q statement 10 the President concerning
the Cunningham coal cases that was alb
solutely false IN three essential particulars,
and that he had wiifully deceived the
President.
At the opening Of the hearing to-day
Judge Vertrees asked Mr.. Pinchot what
frst-hand knowledge he had that rejected
on Mr.. Ballinger as q public official. Judge
vertrees said he did not want innuendo
inference or hearsay but 4 plain state
rent OF what the witness knew of his own
knowledge After a score or more ques-
tons MIR Pinchot finally admitted that he
knew nothing about the Cunningham cases
from his own knowledge except what was
contained in Secretary Ballilngers letter
10 President Taft written on Novembe- To-
1909, and which was a reply 10 charges
made to the President by Mr.. PInchot ana
James r. Garfield. Mr. Pinchot acknoWi-
edged that he had never discussed the
Cunnningham cases with Mr.. Ballinser-
Based on Ronald Letter.
Later in the day Judge NeTtrees again
sought so have Mr.. Pinchot prove MS
charge that in his letter Of November 10
Mr.. Ballinger laid before the President
statement that was absolutely false IN
three essential particulars. The witness ad- /
nitted that his only proof of this charge /
was that among the papers which accom- !
r-snied the communication OF November % /
was letter from ]. T. Ronald, former /
law partner OF Judge Ballinger, which was /
false in three essential particulars Judge /
yertrees again called attention 10 the fact
that the Ronald letter was merely one of /
many Enclosures. and that. as matter of
fact. Judge BaIlinger had written the
President fully on September 3, 1893, in ex-
PLANTATION of the Cunningham cases.
Another interesting fact brought out by /
Judge Kertrees in his examination /
MAS that the cooperative agreement with /
the Forest Service which Judge Ballinger /
discontinued, was not the usual arrange
1nent whereby one department lends its
employees temporarily to another, but pro-
vided that the employees of the Interior
Department should be under the exclusive
control and Jurisdiction of the Forest Ser
vice in the Department Of Agriculture.
Examined with reference TO his charge
THAT the Secretary OF the Interior had de- |
Ceived the President concerning a decision /
hy The Controller Of the Treasury regard /
ing the legality Of the cooperative agree /
ment, Mr. finchot admitted that Mr.. Bal /
Finger had sent a copy Of the Controllers |
s'cc:sioa 10 the President. The witness said |
1iiore was nothing 10 show that the Presi- |
cert had read the decision, and that there |
was an unavoidable Inference that Mr. /
Baliinger had communicated in some other |
nay with the President.