Evening star., 1927-03-09

NOntlnuP0 ITOfH FlSt fHEPJ
not direct him to give replies. Hoover
cited a previous instance in one of
Sinclair'S prior appearances in which
he declined to answer a question, but
when the committee. voted he should,
he did. Hoover statea that the defense
expected to show that the questions
asked were not pertinent to the in
quiry. "and if we show these facts.
we shall ask for a verdict of not
guilty.
Littleton's move to place in evil
dence the previous testimony of Sin
clair was calculated to offset the Gov
ernment evidence which showed that
Sinclair did not answer the questions,
which questions have been declared
pertinent to the inquiry by Justice
Adolph A. Hoehling when the case
reached his court on a demurrer July
IA, 1924. Gordon yesterday sought to
show the questions were pertinent by
producing testimony from the Sem
atOrs who asked the questions which
would reveal what they had I'm mind
at the time, hut this effort was
blocked by the defense. Gordon now
relies on Justice Hoehling's ruling
that the questions are pertinent, and
Justice HitZ said today at one point
In the proceedings: THE pertinency
of these questions has been estab-
lished as far as this court is con-
cerned," referring to Justice Hoehl-
ing's opinion.
Littleton then took issue with the
court. declaring that when Justice
Hoehling made his ruling he could not
know whether Sinclair had testified
before: he did not know a motion had
been made to confine the inquiry tn
the legislative scope of the committee:
he did not know that Senator Bur
sums motion had been voted down
and that Senator Walsh would ask
no questions unless they were directed
at the leases
Justice Seeks Information.
Justice Hitz replied that he would
like the defense to show whether Sin
clair answered all the questions men,
toned in the indictment in earlier
testimony and TO set forth the con-
dition of affairs in the Wyoming
courts when he appeared before the
committee. Littleton here told the
court he thought all the evidence
would be in by noon. and then counsel
would ask to he heard on the law of
all questions.
The burden of Littleton's argument
was what constituted 'pertinency."
He contended that pertinent" mea ns
material and on that phrase the
bill of 1853 on the matter of witnesses
giving testimony before congressional
bodies was passed.
Taking up the eighth count in the
indictment which contains the tlues.
tion about production ut the books of
the Hyvas Corpora ton, which Sinclair
refused to do on March "a. Littleton
said that on December q, 1923. Sin
clair presented summary IF The books
to the committee AMI the members
accepted 1t and expressed satisfaction.
At the same time the books were
brought before the committee but
to avoid delay in examining them
carefully which they would have to
do. the members accepted the sum-
mary.
Senator'S Are Witnesses.
Senator's Reed Smoot of Utah and
Thomas J. Walsh of Montana. both
members of the oil committee where
in originated the present proceedings
were called as Government witnesses
at the afternoon session, but their tes-
timony was very brief.
Both Senators said Sinclair had ap-
peared before their committee in re-
sponse to a subpoena, and Walsh
identified three contracts which were
submitted to the Senator'S at the time.
When Gordon asked if Walsh had
these contracts in mind when he
asked the questions OF Sinclair which
the defendant refused to answer,
Hoover and Littleton objected, and
the court sustained them. Gordon
then announced that's all | have at
the present time" and court was ad-
iourned for the day.