Norwich bulletin., 1913-08-01
Anger General
 at Lobby Probe
CHAIRMAN THREATENS TO
 DISCIPLINE MULHALL
LOBBYIST IS STUBBORN
Members of Committee Clash with Each Other-Committee Bars Barring of MuIhaIPs Private Life.

Washington, July 31.-To an ac- compartment of arguments between counsel and members of the commit tee between democratic and republican cd4amitteemen and between Martin M. Mulhall and everybody connected with the case, the cross examination of the alleged lobbyist for the National As soclation of Manufacturers proceeded today before the senate investigating committee In the five hours Mulhall was on the stand, about l16 questions submitted by counsel for the aSSocla- ton were put to him by 'Chairman OVerman. Robert McCarter and James A. Emery, attorneys for the associa- tion, were denied the right to cross examine the witness directly. but af- ter much debate were permitted to submit questions based upon replies
 the witness made to the queries all ready submitted.
 MulhalI Becomes Stubborn.
 Senators Reed and Walsh and Cum mins and Nelson were almost at swords points on several occasions, but peace always was restored without an
 open break and any iIl-feeling that ex-
 isted was laid away for future refer
 ence. Mulhau himself always an in
 teresting witness, ready to make com
 mentS upon the attorneys of the Ma
 tional Association of Manufacturers or
 it's officials, surpassed himself in spite
 of continual warnings by the chair
 man. He declared once that unless.
 the committee allowed him to have
 counsel he would refuse to answer fur
 ther questions and would rather go to
 jail. Chairman Overman finally be- came so angry that he 1bluntiy told him unless he refrained from super
 f1uous comment and stuck to plain an-
 sWers he would be subjected to dis cipIine. Mulhall subsided after the admonition.
 MuIhaIPs Private Life Shielded. The National Association of Manu- facturers' attorneys attacked Mul- halls story told in his correspondence and his examination in chief along several lines. They sought to show
 that he was discharged and did not resign from the association. They pro- duced statements in a newspaper that published his correspondence before the committee took up the investiga- ton. alleged to have been made by the witness. which he denied. and they questioned him to show that he tried | unavailingly to dispose of his docu- ments to many magazines and news papers without success. An effort to go into Mulhalfs private life was not allowed by the committee.
 A False Friend of McComas. The lawyers were just getting to the question of the motives back of Null
 
 adjourned. The witness had time, however, to deny that he had ''knifed' l the late Senator McComas of Mary 1 land several years ago, working against | the senator while posing as his friend He admitted that he sent out circulars l to business men in Baltimore while seemingly a friend of McCOmaS, but swore that he did this under orders of Marshall Cushing, at that time secre- | tary of the association.
 The lawyers referred to f1attering 1 friendly letter Mulhall wrote Gushing l just after the secretary left the aSSO- | ciation'S employ and then read from 1 another dated a few weeks later, writ 1 ten to an official, in which Mulhall at tackled Cushing bitterly.
 Paid Money to Labor Leader. Examined by members of the com | mittee, Mulhall said Cushing gave him 1 his employment with the National As 1 sociation of Manufacturers and that he
 always thought him a friend until the l latter quit. Then I found out thai i l wasn't even known by name-that l Cushing had given me a number an6 1 that he was taking all the credit fol l what was done here" he said.
 Members of the committee asked Mulhall about items in many of his | expense accounts for the sum of SS( 1 paid to- two party workers in a New 1 Jersey campaign, which appeared al 1 most weekly in his statement for { l long period of 1910. Mulhall swore the | money was paid to- Frank Feeney. { 1 Philadelphia labor leader. He denied
 that he had had a serious disagreement
 with General Manager Bird and At
 torney Emery about thes4 items ol
 that this disagreement had anything l to do with his ''resi gnatiOn." He sWort l too that the disappearance of this par
 ticular item from expense accounts
 rendered after this interview was saiC
 to have taken place, was because tht | campaign was over and not because ht ad IIroS nAd fn IpaN-n it n11