The Washington herald., 1911-04-20

as IL to resent the attorneys words with
force. ..-.'
Further trouble was averted by Mr..
Walkers declaration that the taking Of
testimony before the examiner was not
under subpoena which compelled Ham
mond to testify further. Walker advised
his client to leave the hearing at once
and not to reopen II. The plan now is to
have Mr.. Hammond give mis- testimony
in court or under specific orders from
the court. Walker claimed that Ham
mond had volunteered to give and had
given much testimony that was unneces-
sary, and that it was needless to con-
tinue under the circumstances.
The Lie 1s Passed
At one time, when Mr.. Sully's cotton
warehousing scheme, which Mr.. Ham
mond said he had plagiarized from Mr..
Tomkins, was under discussion, Mr..
Hammond declared that Mr.. Sully would
be quite capable of stealing not only Mr..
Tomkins' idea, but also his money"
This statement brought about a heated
reply on the part Of Mr.. Cuttings, Mr.
Sully's attorney. who said to Mr.. Ham
mond: I'VE will substantiate a lack OF
confidence in your reputation" to which
Mr. Hammond replied he was willing to
stake his reputation against that of Mr.
Sully in any part of the world. To this
Mr.. Cuttings replied that his diamonds 81
reputation was at stake now.
Toward the close Of the hearing, when
Attorney Cuttings questioned Mr.. Ham
mond with regard to the value of the
Doremus cotton gin and differentiated
as to its value as a model and as a pat
ented invention. Mr.. Hammond charged
Mr.. Sullys counsel with trying to mis-;
lead him. which insinuation Attorney
Gittings denied.
Plagiarism Charged.
When the hearing opened Mr.. Cuttings
asked Mr.. Hammond whether he was
able to produce Mr.. Tomkins' circular in
which he made the statement that Mr..
Sully plagiarized his idea with regard to
the cotton warehousing scheme
Mr.. Hammond replied he had never
made such statement. Mr.. Hammond
said his attention to the circular had been
called by Mr.. Dalgleisch after his re-
turn from Russia.
Attorney Cuttings handed Mr. Hammond
a copy Of Mr.. Sullys plan and asked him
to compare II with Mr.. Tomkins' cir.
cular, and point out wherein existed
similarity. Mr. Sully's plan covers
eleven and one-half typewriter pages.
and MIR. Tomkins' one page and a half.
Mr.. Hammond said that paragraph two
In the Sully plan was practically the
same as that of Mr.. Tomkins circular.
Mr.. Hammond said Sullys scheme was
in effect the same as that OF Tomkins,
and being asked by Attorney Cuttings
If he had ever heard of warehousing
grain and other products. Mr.. Hammond
replied he was told 1t was never carried
out in cotton.
At this juncture Attorney Cuttings
again questioned Mr.. Hammond with
regard to his statement that Sully had
plagiarized Tomkins scheme. Mr.. Ham
mond denied having made the state
mant attributed to him by a morning
newspaper. and asked to have the stem
ographic notes read referring to the
question. The notes were produced and
read. but Mr.. Hammond also questioned
the accuracy of the notes.
Being asked wherein the stenographic
statement was incorrect. Mr.. Hammond
answered he had not obtained informa-
ton from Mr.. Tomkins that Mr.. Sully
had plagiarized his idea, but he cleaned
the information from Tomkins' circular.
He also denied saying that the circular
was signed by Tomkins.
A letter from Harris Hammond, the
son and a partner of John Hays Ham,
mond. to Mr.. Sully. referring to the
cotton gin, was placed in evidence.
He Became Suspicious.
Replying to a question by Attorney
Cuttings as to when he first became sus-
picious OF Mr. Sully. Mr.. Hammond said
it was when he cabled him to Paris, |
where he was negotiating with the Hirsch
syndicate for the sale of the gin; that his |
sole basis for his lack OF confidence in
Sully was a basis of test, coupled with |
the fact that Mr.. Doremus had stated |
that the gin was a failure; that he had |
never seen a commercial gin, and also |
In view Of the fact that Sully had pre-
pared TO sell stock to the public.
Mr.. Hammond was asked whether he |
knew Gen. Hubbard, of the International |
Company, Of this city. He said |
he had known him many years, and he |
also said he had met Mr.. TAFT, Of the !
same institution. once or twice
Personally. you endeavored TO secure |
A loan OF 100000 from the International |
Banking Company" Attorney Cuttings |
asked Mr.. Hammond. who refused to an
Hammond, on advice of counsel declined |
tc answer when the same question was
Put to him in a different form.
Referring to Mr.. Sully's visit to the
iirsch syndicate in Paris, Mr.. Ham,
nond said: IF Mr.. Sully had endeavored
r. secure any money. from the Hirsch |
syndicate in spite of my cablegram II
would have been an attempt to rob them
Of money"
Mr.. Hammond testified that Mr. Dore-
nus told Sully not to say the gin was
commercial gin. and that Sully told him
70 keep quiet II he wanted any more
honey out of it; that he was managing
he matter. It was further stated by M.
Hammond that the report made by Mr.
iilvray, a cotton expert, was different
rom what Mr.. Sully had led him to
believe, and that Sully could not make
him believe the gin was commercial