New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-04-21
pApNrs LISTENING, TO ROOSEVELTS TESTIMONY.

matters that grew to be an issue be-
tween me and Senator Plat,
Q.-Perhaps you will explain what
YOU mean by issue between you ana
Senator Plat. A-Senator 7 latt was
the head of the organization, the
leader, or well. he was publicly
known as the boss"
Well. he was the leader, anyway!
A.-The leader Of the organi7ation'
and the organization. as / mad Prev
ously known, as speedily found out
the organization controlled the ma.
iority of the Republican members OF
the Legislature. and at times worked
together with the Democratic organl-
cation.
Issues with Mr.. Platt
Q.-Weli, did not mean by my qucs-
ton 10 call forth that at this moment.
The issues that you had with Mr.. Plat
and which YOU discussed with Mr..
Barnes, did they relate to legislative or
executive action? A-They related to
legislative action and executive action,
where either intended to do something
as Governor or desired that the Legis-
lature should do something legislative,
OF WUtlt MI / ldbl anu liit VI bNiAH"
ton were antagonistic to what | did or
proposed 70 do. so that sometimes the
discussion related to executive action
and sometimes 10 legislative action.
Mr.. Bowers asked Colonel Roosevelt
whether he discussed with Mr.. Barnes
the matters to which he had referred
as issues with Mr.. Plat. Mr.. WINS OBJ
jected, but the court permitted the
Colonel to answer, 81 did and Mr..
Bowers resumed his examination, ask
! ing:
! "Now, will you mention some Of the
matters that you so discussed with Mr..
| Barnes or with Mr.. Plat ?"
/ Mr.. Wins again objected, and the
court suggested it was important to
know what matters he intended to
state.
81 mean to take up in the first in
stance" said Mr.. Bowers, "some mat
/ tiers that are not of great materially,
/ showing the ordinary course of bust
ness in so far as it was known to,sor,
rather. so far as it was brought in by
/ the defendant in this case with Mr..
Barnes, or by any of the other gentle
men concerned in the interests of the
Republican party after Mr.. Barnes was
connected with it,"
Odd you have a discussion with
Mr.. Barnes on the question OF your ex-
ecutive action concerning canal mat
!ers?
Mr.. Bowers That is not pleaded in
justifcation-in fact, | did not know
about il when the answer was drawn
but there were conversations had upon
that question which was the general
course of business and showed the
business that Mr. Barnes talked.
"I will waive that question for the
moment" said Mr.. Wins. 81 may come
back to it later"
Did you have any discussion with
him will have to lead now, your
honor concerning a proposed fran
chise tax legislation?
Mr.. Ivins-I object, if your honor
please, as not constituting, or anything
which may have resulted from 1t a:
constituting, justification for the libe
complained Of.
The Court-Why isn't it materia
now? This article charges, as yoi
claim and as | have held so far, tina
the article constitutes a libel because
il charges, generally, a corrupt allianc,
. between Mr.. Barnes and Mr.. Murph!
with regard TO the government Of tn
! state.
Mr.. Ivins-At present, If your homo
/ please; not in respect 10 the yea
1899
The Court-It alleges specifically III
, course Of business under that charge
That Mr.. Barnes and Mr. Murph
t worked in pursuance of their plan
| through corrupt alliance betwee
: business and politics. They charg
= that the state government is crooke
> and that il is crooked because of tn
! predominarce of Mr.. Murphy and Nj
Barnes. That is enough for the pres
ent.
, Now. as | understand, they inten
, TO prove by this evidence that Will
= they were discussing this franchise ia
{ law Mr.. Barnes conceded or claimed o
/ admitted that he was receiving for tn
Republican organization a contribu
? tion from both the Democrats and tn
, Republicans. and that these contribu
tions were made with the understand
r ing that the contributors should be pre-
! tected by the state government. Now,
] Go not quite see why proof that tina
, was the fact-and that proof can b
, made by admissions-why the proof
not at least a partial justification O
this libel.
: Q.-Before you go into that | woul
like TO ask you whether at the time o
r those conversations you had or ma
r not sent any messages to the Legs
! lature upon the subject. That IL, II yo
have any recollection at this momen
= Al had a number % conversation
with Mr.. Barnes in periods for a perio
! OF weeks. perhaps once before, and Ger
tainly one at least after the act wa
| passed.
| Conversations With Barnes.
Q-Now ! want you TO tell me wha
Z you can recoMect as 10 the converse
lions that passed between you and NJ
q Barnes, or between you and any othe
e persons. with Mr.. Barnes present, cor
5 corning a franchise tax, concernin
1 that action upon it in every respect
! Mr.. lvins-l shall have to ask cour
SCI 20 FIX the date Of the conversation
Q.-Tell Us the dates, please, as we
5 as you can. Al cannot tell the date
e any more accurately than have state
| Q.-Hou know it was the year 1898
e At was IN she spring of the yea
: 1929. Probably the conversations b,