Evening star., 1941-08-01
Dupont Circle
Continued From First Page

tCOntlnued FROM FlrSt Pa2e.)
Mr.. Newman by Mr.. Furey and pay
ment was in cash.
Mr.. Somerville said that to his
knowledge he had never met Mr.
Newman until July 2, adding that
neither he nor his corporation had
| authorized Mr. Newman to act as its
agent in negotiating deal with the
Government to lease the property
or TO sell it. He said he had no
knowledge of Mr.. Newman or his ac-
tivitieS.
Representative McGregor of Ohio
stated:
The record shows that Mr.. New
man made this statement when he
appeared before us as witness or
Tuesday, July %, and l quote from
his testimony: I was elected presi-
dent and hold that office now as 9
result of the 100 per cent vote ol
those same men who bought this
building in 1887
rs that statement correct?" he
asked Mr. Somerville.
The answer was: 1T is not. He
was elected a director by us"
Then Mr.. McGregor said: He wa'
not elected president. Then his
statement is wrong?"
Mr.. Somerville replied, 1T is
! wrong"
Representative Hebert Of Louisi-
ana said the lease was signed
by Mr.. Newman on July / as presi.
dent of the Dupont Circle, Inc, with
the Government. Did any one out
side of yourself have any authority
on July to sign lease for the
Dupont Circle Apartment"
Mr.. Somerville answered, only
one other person would have had
that authority. 1t would have been
Mr.. Furey."
Chairman Lanham then said, Nc
one as president?'
Mr.. Somerville answered, mo one
as president. No, sir
500 Shares of Stock.
In reply to questions by Mr.
Hebert, Mr.. Somerville said his cor
poration. representing Mr.. Furey
Mr.. Rogers and himself, had 500
shares of stock, all of which were
sold to the new owners.
The old owners received the diff
ference between the old mortgage
of sl,146,000 held by the Prudential
Co and the new mortgage for
81 ,250,000 by the Metropolitan Life
Insurance Co., which amounted to
sl04,000, and a cashiers check for
s250,000 paid by MI. Newman.
Mr.. Somerville said there was a
$4,000 allowance" out of the
amount the sellers received which
went to new owners in lieu of a
sales commission. He did not know
who received the s35, 5,0OO-whether
Mr.. Newman or some one else.
Representative Bell of Missouri
argued this was a payment for
having brought about the sale of
the stock. Mr.. Somerville insisted
it was an allowance"
New directors Elected.
The old stock owners elected three
new directors before they quit the
corporation, Mr.. Somerville said
These were Mr.. Newman, Charles P.
Armstrong and another whom he
did not recall.
! In reply to a question by Repre-
sentative McGregor, Mr.. Someryille
said it was not Charles SAWYER
Democratic National Committeeman
for Ohio, who made a previously dis
cussed inspection trip of the build
ing with Mr.. Newman and Senator
TydingS. He then said the third
man was a Mr.. Grosjean. Repre-
sentative Hebert of Louisiana said
that is very familiar" and called
attention that it was the same name
as that of the late Huey Longs sec
retary.
Mr.. Hebert asked Mr. Somerville
so all the negotiations with the
Government were by some one who
didn't have red cent invested?"
The reply was yes"
Mr.. Somerville also admitted that
officially he still knows nothing of
a lease with the Government except
as "hearsay."
Chairman Lanham asked Paul v.
Rogers if he would let Mr.. Furey
know that the committee would like
to have him as witness on Tues
day.
Questioned on Maintenance.
Mr.. Guthridge took the stand
again as today's hearing opened
Chairman Lanham questioned
him regarding the maintenance cost
OF the apartment. The gross in
come from the apartment in 1916
was S368, 500 and the maintenance
and operating cost $4,000, so the
revenue would be approximately
S248 900. Mr.. Guthridge testified. The
rental by the Government would be
$209,000 and the Government also
would pay 1000 for custodial
service.
Asked by Mr.. Lanham if the
rental to the Government would be
as financially profitable to the
owners as to continue operation OF
the building as an apartment hotel
Mr.. Guthridge said he thought il
would be less advantageous because
OF interest, amortization, taxes and
other costs.
Representative McGregor asked
Mr.. Guthridge if all Government
requirements had been met by
the Dupont Circle. Inc. He replied
in the affirmative, and Mr.. Nc.
Gregor asked how he justified that
A lengthy argument ensued.
Mr.. McGregor criticized the actor
of the Government in moving in