New-York tribune., 1918-06-12
T. a. Campbell, suddenly unleashed an
attack ON the Witness' character.

We're YOU not on trial in Chicago for
taking money under false pretences
Did you not serve ninety days for
vagrancy in Milwaukee number of
years ago."
Fast and accusing the queries ratified
out. To each one the witness. choking
down his patent anger, returned curt.
"No." At length he turned to the
court and asked the privilege of max
ing statement.
Court Warns Attorney
at isn't necessary for you to make
a statement" replied Judge Manton.
what right have YOU" his honor con-
t;nued to the questioning attorney, ITO
make an attack of this sort on w.t.
nesss character? Have you any proof
to substantiate the charges you are
making against this man in asking
these questions 2"
Mr.. Fowler admitted that he had not,
but said he thought he might be able
to produce some if given time. In the
event of his failure herein, the court
announced that it will compel Mr.. row
ler to apologize to the witness.
Later, on redirect examination,
question from the government gave Mr..
Bishop an opportunity to explain that
while, technically, he had been convict
GQ OIL II NtS dliSy tidl III ~
it had been q misunderstanding IN tne
course of some work he was doing tor
the American Directory Company, with
which firm he is still connected.
AS to the actual manufacturing plans
of the Emerson people, the prosecution
asked Mr.. Bishop few direct questions,
but important parts of his report bear
ing on this matter were read to the
jury. One of these, after declaring
that the proposition really plvoted upon
the question as to what kind OF car
could be produced SO cheaply as the
Emerson people proposed, continued,
prices which had been made to them
by certain manufacturers of parts. We
found that they arc not in position
to give out these figures in their en-
tirety, yet they do give out figures on
some of the parts, and then, by approx
mating, our expert believes (states)
that a car could be built at that price !;
but there will be IS much difference in
it's appearance on the circulars and
when it is in the market as there is
between a PierceArrow and Ford
Thousands of circulars containing an
illustration Of the car have been sent
broadcast, and this has been an induce
ment for some investors to buy the
stock
Paper Rejects Advertising
Unless the company was in a posi-
tion to manufacture certain Of it's own
automobile parts, the report added, it
was the belief of the Bishop Service
that an equipment almost as extensive
as the Ford plant would be needed to
insure success. 3
William H. Garland, counsel for
Henry B. Humphrey, strove to get Mr
Bishop to say his was not a sufficiently
statistical report to have justified Mr.
Humphrey in rejecting the Emerson
business. A good deal of ironic cor
respondence between the witness and
the Boston advertising agent, was pro-
duced in this connection, while the de-
Tending attorney made much of the
fact that portions Of the report were
based upon "hearsay."
Immediately thereafter, however, Mr.
Osborne produced a letter from
Thomas A. Lowery, manager of finan-
cial and industrial advertising on "The
Chicago Tribune," in which the adver-
tisements subsequently put out by
Humphrey were emphatcally rejected
by that paper. Referring to the S6,-
$4,000 worth of stock given by the
Emerson company to R. c. Hupp in
exchange for "plans, specifications and
QcSlSuS, LIE lctCeT QcCldIcQ Clldt tulS
one item would damn this company
forever with The Tribune"
On the stand Mr.. Lowery supple
mented this with the recital OF how
Mr.. Humphrey had actually come on to
Chicago in person in an attempt to
convince him of the soundness of the
company. Still, the witness said. after
listening to all the advertising mans
arguments, "The Chicago Tribune" had
not felt that the proposition was one
to which it could lend it's advertising
columns.
Believes Defendants Honest
Mr. Lowery added that he had knowr
! the Campbells for a number of year.
and was familiar with some of T
A. CampbelPs former automobile
ventures. Of the honesty of these de
PENDANTS he assured the court he wa:
fully persuaded. Of their business ca
liabilities, though, especially as relat
not say as much.
The Bishop report likewise devote,
considerable space to this phase o
the Emersonian intricacy. Of Willis
George Emerson, it said that he coult
hardly be called anything but a pro
moter, SO far as his association with tn,
car that bore his name was concerned d
Although a financial paper had assoc
ated his name with copper fiasco tha
cost many investors dear, the Bisho,
/ Service stated its belief in Mr.. Emer
sons personal honesty, but it quail
fled this by pointing out that, in so fa1
as he had never demonstrated anv ex
ecutive ability on a large scale. h,
! could hardly be spoken of as an auto
mobile man or a man who would lent
any strength to any concern which ex
poets to make thousands of cars ;
year"
Hupp's pretensions to automobile su
| rrcmacy the report largely discounted
noting his numerous failures and sug
/ gesting that the time has come fo1
/ him to get down to hard work" 1t alst
| dealt at length with George B. Clifford
/ defendant whose name appeared or
the Emerson board of directors as ;
| Standards Oil associate
eve have information from severa
banks" said the report on Clifford
that they have notes with his indorse
ment, and that they have had and arc
having considerable trouble in eettin,
their money" Financially, the Bishol
Investigators found, Mr.. Clifford hat
often in the past peen tangled up.
Besides this report itself, the jur,
yesterday got the tale of how it came
into being. This was supplied in par
by Mr.. Bishop, in part by P. J. Evans
an ,employe of the Humphrey agency
and in part by the minutes of an eX.
animation of the defendant, William
A. Morgan, which Mr.. Osborne spent
some two and a half hours reading te n
the court.