The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1912-12-17

1 Washington, Dec. 17.-Six letters from William Randolph Hearst's S sheaf of Standard Oil correspondence, i purporting to show that Senator Boise Penrose, of Pennsylvania, former Sen ator Foraker, of Ohio, and ex-Repre- sentative Sibley, of Pennsylvania, were intimately acquainted with John D. Archbold. political strategist of the oil trust, were revealed to the Clapp committee, today, by the publisher. Hearst insisted he did not know how the letters were obtained from Archbo1d's files. He named John Eddy, one of his employees, a news paperman, as being the one from now in London. The editor admitted that he had other letters and, after a long controversy, finally consented to give them to the committee which whether, they bear on the investiga- ton of campaign contributions and shall be made public.
 The letters introduced today were: Penrose to Archbold regarding a, Every important matter on which he would see Senator Aldrich; two letters, Arch $5O,OO0; Archbold to sibley, inclosing a s5,000 certificate of deposit; two let ters. Archbold to F'oraker, regarding a bill then pending in the Ohio Legis- lature regulating monopolies.
 John l.. Kennedy, formerly a mem Der of the Industrial Commission, on which Penrose served, denied that the Pennsylvania Senator exerted any un- usual influence in shaping the com missions recommendations.
 With Hearst their star witness. committee resumed its probe today. Two former public officials, whom Hearst has charged with receiving large sums from the oil trust, were aXa finT1-fnrT7nT for Foraker of Ohio, and ex-Representa- tive Grosvenor, also of the Buckeye State
 Hearst took the stand when the hearing opened. Chairman C1app ask ed what he knew about letters pulp lished in his magazine, Hearst said he had some which had not been published At C1app's request, Hearst then produced photographic copies of the published Archbold letters.
 Are these original 1etters?' asked the original letters,'' was the reply.
 When was this exhibit photograph "I don't know. have never seen the originals the publisher replied. Der. 19Os."
 "Did you ever see the originals of any of the letters published in Hearst's Magazine?" asked C1app. "I am not sure, but recall having seen
  September, 1908."
 "Of whom did you get them?'' ask ed the chairman.
 Hearst paused He declared he was anxious to aid the investigation but he wanted to know whether an an- swer was essential. Tt is our wish the original letters,'' said the chair man.
 The witness leaned forward mo- ment and then remarked that Arch bold had marked most of the let ters as genuine
 Pomerene called attention to the resolution which authorized the com rnittee to obtain the Archbold letters.
 Hearst then stated that he obtain ed the photographs from John Eddy, who wrote the first four articles in for the last two years, has been liv- ing in London. He said he knew of no circumstances which would tndi- cate to him the identity of the per son who photographed the originals.
 A letter purporting to come from Archbold dated Jan P. 1902, was to make a loan of $50,O00 to Foraker, half to be returned within one year and the rest in payments of $5,O0O Representative 'sibly. of Pennsyl- vania, enclosing a certificate was then read. Another Foraker letter refer ring to your enclosure" and urging ing 500 introduced by MT. Price be striclS- en out" and remarking that other wise the situation is well in hand" was forwarded to ArchboId.
 Answering question by Senator Clapp, Hearst said that he had pre- scented copies of such letters as seem ed to refer to financial transactions"
 Senator Oliver insisted on seeing the correspondence held back by the publisher the authenticity of which in Divers argument. Pomerene in sisted that the letters still withheld by Hearst be given to the chairman and that they be examined in execu- tive session. The chairman made this a formal request and Hearst agreed to comply. publication in which Hearst is inter ested.
 'Is there anything that you now re- cali % asked Clapp, upon which you attention has not been called here that may be of service to this investigation of campaign contributions % League campaign in 19OS," was the answer. ''It amounted to s1o.Ooo or si2,OOo: I do not think
 Senator Oliver asked concerning the alleged letter of Archbold to regarding the deposit for $5o,oOO. you by MT. Eddy, was there any let ter tending to show a return of the moneyE he demanded. 'I believe l there was, answered Hearst. ''I think that is why stated in my | speeches after Senator Foraker had l stated that he had returned this mon | ey, that I accepted his explanation
 You did not publish that, how ever?" NO, I did not publish that letter.
 The photographic copies submitted | by Hearst were the following:
 January g, 1902.
 My Dear Senator: Referring to our 6''rther talk of today over the tele-