Connecticut western news., 1917-01-11
LlWS0,! FACES
 ACTION BY HOUSE
Refusal to Give Facts May
 Bring Him In Contempt.
DEFIES RULES COMMITTEE

Words, but No Evidence at Hearing
 and Barely Escapes Fist Fight-Pres-
 ident Exonerates Humility From Ad
 vance Knowledge of Peace Note.
 A lesson in stock market speculation, several denialS and more 'prOmiScS" were the net results of the preliminary peace leak investigation before the house rules committee.
 Bernard M. Baruch, investor and speculator," furnished the instructions on how to beat Wall street as he out lined the course of his trading in the peace bear raid."
 Charles H. Sabin, president of the Guaranty Trust company of New York, and Otto H. Kahn of Kuhn, Loeb X Co. furnished the denialS, asserting that they had nothing to do with either peace leaks or peace panics.
 Thomas w. Lawson supplied the promises, asserting that if the commit tee ordered q formal investigation of the leak charges he would name a cabinet minister, another high govern ment official and d big banker mention ed to him as making millions" out of the leak.
 There were no traces of the real leak in the testimony, and Baruch, Kahn and Sabin all entered fiat cOntradic- tiOns of the rumOrS, reports and SuS picions which connected them with any advance information on President Will sons move for peace.
 Their testimony followed renewal of Lawson's verbal battle with the com mittee.
 The Boston broker kept the hearing in turmoil with his constant refusal to name the high officials who profted by the leak. Finally, after half dozen motions to refer LawSon's conduct to | the house with the recommendation | that he be held in contempt, he told | Chairman Henry that he would divulge l the names before a real" Investigating committee if one was created. Sweeping denials of any knowledge of any leak were made by Secretary of State Lansing and Joseph F. Tumulty, | secretary to the president. Both sec retaries manifested indignation at be- ing dragged from their duties to an swer foolish questions. They convinced political friends and foes on the com mittee that they neither knew of any l leak nor have ever heard of one till the 1 leak story was in full swing about the capital.
 All efforts to shake out of Thomas W. Lawson any concrete substantiation of his sensational charges proved un- availing. The committee threatened him with punishment by the house for refusing to answer questions. Mr. Law son profanely said he did not care what they did. The committee told hin he was not in a barroom. Mir. Lawson thanked them for the information and apologiZed to the ladies who composed more than half of the audience that packed the committee room.
 What They Asked Him.
 These are the specific questions fol refusing to answer which Lawson was threatened with contempt proceedings
 Who was the cabinet officer mentioned by the member of congress in his conver sation with you as having dealt in stocks at the time of this leak?
 Who was the member of congress wh told you this?
 What was the date and what are thu circumstances of this conversation?
 Most of the time Lawson was rec with rage. When the committee wa. not admonishing him he was admon ishing the committee. But though h. piled up insinuations against senators representatives and cabinet members neither wheedling nor threats coulj draw from him a single name. By way of adding to his previous ill timations of scOundrelly copartner ship between Washington and Wal street, Lawson said that a member o congress had told him that a membe of the cabinet had profited by the leak He refused to give the name. ant that started a clash with Represents tive Chiperfield, who, after d narrowl averted fistic encounter, moved tha
 the committee recommend to the hous that the witness be punished for con tempt. The resolution was held il abeyance.\