Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1911-06-21
Case IsRe-openedby
Senate Committee.
Reason for New Inquiry Is
In That 100000 Fund.
Mgr. Hines 0fHarYester Co. Was
Asked 10 Give $4,000.
Pres. Mccormick, Witness, Says
He Approved Hines Refusal.
Lorlmer's Counsel Asserts Harvest.
er Co. Connected with Enemies. I

washington, June 20-Through its
first witness, Cyrus I'll. Mccormick of
Chicago. president of the International
Harvester Co, the Senate committee
investigating Senator Lorimer's right
to his seat, succeeded today in intro
ducins into its record the principal
allegation upon which the Senate was
induced to reopen the case against
the Illinois senator.
1t was to Clarence Funk, manager of
the Harvester Co. that Edward Hines
is alleged to have made the request
for a contribution of $4,000 as part of
a fund of 100000 to be raised in Lor-
liners behalf. Mr.. Mccormick said
Funk told him of this proposal and
nat he refused and that by his refus-
al he won his (McCormick's commen-
da.ion. Mccormick said further that
the Harvester CO. made it a practice
20 hold aloof from politics and to avoid
efforts to influence legislation.
Taking this as a cue, counsel for
Senator Lorimer sought to show that
in many states the company made an
effort to prevent the passage Of bills
4~2onsidered objectionable to it. The
Witness admitted that the company
opposed in a general way legislation
providing for the manufacture OF
binding Irvine in prisons.
M. Lorimer was represented today
by William J. Hynes of Chicago, whose
primary purpose in attending the
meetings is to represent Edward Hines,
the Chicago lumberman, whose name
has oeen brought into the case as that
of the originator of the alleged fund of
$500. 900 in Lorimer's interest. In view
of the absence of Judge Elbrldge G..
Hancey. Mr.. Lorimer's personal coun-
sci, the committee permitted Mr.
Hynes TO represent the senator at to-
days hearing. BY his course, Mr..
-Hynes made il clear that il is the IN
tention of Mr.. Lorimer TO neglect no
line of defence. Although Mr.. Mccor-
.micks testimony against the accused
senator was only of hearsay character
the attorney sought by every means in
his power to break IL down
The evident purpose was to show
great motive for the opposition to Mr..
Lorimer and to connect the Harvester
60. with 1t.
Mr.. Hynes based his questions 10
xAkeklNf3bicls on allegations by Rodney
relating to litigation between
land the company. Swift was
II 1Hhected with the company and
I'D left it he was sued by the
Nl53Eo{ for a large sum of money. a
c0dHter suit was brought asking for
an accounting and alleging efforts by
the company to influence legislation in
its behalf in various states. There was
a settlement of the litigation and MIR
Mccormick said he thought Swift paid
the company about $4,000.
Admitting that his purpose was to
controvert the testimony of Mr.. Me
Cormick that the company does not
engage in legislative efforts. Mr., Hines
read several of the charges. one was
that the organization made every eff
fort to prevent legislation in South
Dakota providing for the manufacture
of binding Irvine by convicts.
we always oppose such legislation"
said the witness. because machinery
plays an important part in the max
ing of twine.'
The committee did not determine
whether Mr. Hynes shall be permitted
ito represent Mr. Hines. Owing to the
accusations made against the lumber
man he desired the privilege of ques-
tioning witnesses who may attack his
client. The committee will meet next
Thursday.