New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-04-21

N
!, n;hntora to the Republican campaign
fund. He did not say, judge-thls 10 ~
raference 10 what you said upon INC
do not remember MN say,hs
that thew had contributed to MN
I cannot say whether they were con
tributions TO the state or county cam
naign funds, but they were-the sta'e
menta they had been Of great use 10 Us
they were among the heaviest con
tributors Of the campaign fund' shiu
that II was perfectly natural tnat ml;
Prvun should contribute, that ne naI
becn a Republican, and / knew haa
b.cked M the Republican party; Dut
tbot had always understood that MI
Anthony Brady was very strong penn,
Eat and that the Democratic mao
go i, or heard it stated that tne
Democratic member OF the Legislature
~ that time from Albany, man Dy
~ name of Kelley, had been very
much opposed to this bill. A.,
NJ fyins again objected that the
hill was not specified. but was over
iu NJ Roosevelt Kelley had been
protesting against the passage OF
the bill on the ground that IT wouid
hurt Mr.. Bradys interests, ana 80 !
was surprised to learn that Mr. prauy
had contributed to the republican
fund. And Mr.. Barnes answered thet
Mr.. Brady contributed, not as mat,
ter of politics. but as matter oL
business. because he could not nave
tho great interests he represented eN
posed to attacks by demagogues ana
scoundrels in the Legislature pc
Iiavo that the expression that he used
- no
widows and orphans who had invested
in the concerns Of which he was the
head. | say | believe it was an eX-
pression which he used TO me, and
think Mr.. Barnes used il on this occa-
sion.
Mr. WINS don't get your relative
pronouns. You have used he In
two or three different ways. ! DO not
know whether you are referring to Mr..
Brady or Mr.. Barnes.
The witness then repeated the state
ment and went on to ampllfy 1t: nat
big business men had to take such
action, in order TO protect their own
great interests, and that if the Re
publican party adopted a populistic or
socialistic creed, all of the contribu-
tons would be made to the Demo-
cratic party, and that it was neces-
sary that the Republican party be kept
as the conservative party. ! answered
that | certainly would not willingly do
any injustice to any corporation out
that, if any corporation made con-
tribution with the expectation that IL
would receive consideration when,
from the popular standpoint, | regard
ed as improper, that corporation was
in error. | think the expression |
tLaf a
I am not sure that used that express.
sion. That is the expression th'Df !
used. Il was, believe, at a subse-
quent conversation, but 1t may nave
been at the same conversation that l
expressed to Mr.. Barnes my astonlsh-
ment that when | sent my special
message to the Legislature TO expe-
dite the first or Ford franchise tax
bill, that it should have been. torn up
by the Speaker. Mr.. Barnes told me
that it was foolish of me to expect
the Speaker and Mr. Aids to act in
such matter until they mad their
orders or directions from the organi-
cation.
Mr.. Bowers-Who was Mr.. Aids? A..
Mr.. Aids was the leader Of the AS
sembly at that time-the floor leader
of the Assembly-and it was Mr. Nixon
and Mr.. Aids who would usually come
to me about matters from the Assem-
bly,.
Mr.. Bowers-I regard the answer that
has been given here in the presence
Of the jury-it will not be an impro-
priety for me TO refer to lt-I regard
that answer in the response to the
question, "Who was Mr.. Aids" as
giving information which ought to be
I laid before the jury. If you will recall
! the answer that was made by Mr..
Barnes as Mr.. Roosevelt has stated 1t
TO us, it was that Mr.. Roosevelt was
complaining of his message being torn
Up, instead of being used, and that Mr..
Barnes responded to him that was nat
ural, because generally they would not
act in such a matter until they had re-
ceived directions or orders.
Q.-Now you will please state any
further conversation that you had with
Mr.. Barnes during that period concern
| ing the franchise tax bill. Al dis
I cussed with him in substance a letter
/ of protest | had received from Sena-
/ tor Platt about it. But | do not re-
member whether it was in that discus
I sion upon that letter or at previous
! discussion that we spoke of Anthony
/ Brady and the contributions. But
/ be ieve that at least on two or three
! occasions we went over in substance
| the question of the donation or con-
| trbutions of men of one political party
to the other political party, or to both
/ political parties at the same time. Mr..
/ Barnes justified it on the ground
/ have given. That was not IN one con-
versation only, but it was, believe,
! in two or three.
Odd you have any talk with Mr..
Barnes concerning correspondence with
Mr. Plat upon the subject Of the fran
chise bill? You can answer that yes or
no. A.-Yes, sir
Q.-Was there correspondence be-
tween you and Senator Platt upon the
subject of the franchise bill? Al
think there was. had several CONVEX
sations, and think that they were be-
fore sent any message in at all.
Referring to the pressure for re-
appointment of Mr.. Payn as Insurance
Superintendent, Mr.. Bowers asked:
you quoted to the plaintiff what Mr.
Platt had said?" to which the witness
replied:
What Mr.. Platt had said to the eff
feet that Mr. Payn's relations with GER
tain of the big financial men were such