Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Morning Oregonian. (Portland, Or.) 1861-1937 | View Entire Issue (June 23, 1905)
r THE 3I0RXIXG OREGOXIA, FRIDAY, ZVXE 23, 1905. 1 "FIRM'S BOOKS WOULD NOT ONLY INDICT, BUT CONVICT'-MITCHELU that the list referred to In the letter as being- enclosed? A. Yes. sir; that is the list. I find my mark on the back of it. Q. The Indorsement on the back Is In your handwriting? A. res. Q. And the Indorsement Is "Kribs No. 4"? A. Tea. Q. Did you receive a reply from Senator Mitchell to that letter of April 3D. 1802. or those two letters? A- Yes. sir. I did. O. Is the paper you now hold In your hand that reply? A. Yes, sir. Q. Does It bear hie signature? A. Yes, It does. Q. Received by you In due course of mall about the date it bears? A. Yes. Mr. Honey: We will offer this In evidence. The same was read In evidence as Government's Exhibit 3C, as follows: Mitchell Receives the Lists. Government's Exhibit. ?Co. 36: Committee of Coast Defenses, United States Senate, "Washington, D. C. May S, 1902. Hon. A. H. Tanner, attomey-at-law. Commercial block. Portland, Or. My Dear Judge: I beg to acknowledge receipt of yours of April 30, Inclosing sep arate letter relating to other lands in "the Hoseburg land district, which have been selected In lieu of forest reserve lands under act of June 4. 1897. Kribs; Ho. A. - I will look . the matter up. ascertain status and see what can be done. Sincerely yours. JOHN H. MITCHELL. Q. J hand you on letter paper appear ing to be a carbon copy oi a letter. Is that taken from the flies of your office? A. Yes. it Is. Q. Is- that a carbon copy of a letter mailed by vou to Senator Mitchell at or about the date it bears? A. Yes. sir. Q. And signed by you? A. Yes. Q. It refers to the inclosure of a sep arate letter. Can you Identify the letter of five sheets which appears to be a car bon copy as to whether or not that Is a carbon copy of the Inclosure referred to? A. I suppose that Is a copy of the let ter which was Inclosed. Mr. Honey: Under the rules we are re quired to offer the Inclosure as well. If counsel desires. The Court: If the inclosure does not refer to matters set out in the Indictment It is not relevant. Mr. Hcncy: It does not. But I will have it marked for identification as a copy of the inclosure referred to In the letter of May 5. 1902, and I will read the other letter In evidence. Same was read in evidence as Govern ment's exhibit 37 as follows: Mitchell Sent $380.50. Government's Exhibit No. 37: "May 3, 1902. "Hon. John H. Mitchell. United States Senate, "Washington. D. C: "Dear Senator I Inclose you herewith duplicate deposit tag for $350.59. being your share of the proceeds of our business for the month of April. "I am Just in receipt of your favors of April 28 and 29. that of the 23th relating to Colonel Teal's matter, which I will ex plain to him. and the one oi the 29th relating to the forest lieu selections of John A. Benson, concerning which I will Inclose a separate letter. "I understand from your dispatch of April 29 that all of the lands Included in lists 1. 2 and 3, being timber entries in the Roseburg Land Office, have been passed by the Honorable Commissioner to the Secretary of the Interior, with the rec ommendation that they be ordered to patent. Am I correct In this? Lists 1. 2 and 3. you will remember, were the lands in which Mr. Kribs is Interested and are all timber entries. Have you any idea when we may expect action on th port of the Secretary of the Interior in the matter? "With kind regards to all. 1 remain. yours truly." Q. I hand you a paper bearing the printed heading of the Western Unlpn Telegraph Company "Received at." Is that paper taken from your files? A. Yes, sir, it was. Q. Was that telegram received bj you at about the date It boars? A. Yes. sir. . Mr. Heney: We wilt offer this In evi dence. Same was received as Government's Ex hibit 3S, and read as follows: "All Right in a Few Dnys." Washington. D. C. May 9, 1902. Hon. A. H. Tanner. 73S Johnson street, Portland. Oregon: Cases before becretary will be all right In a few days. Patents will Issue. JOHN H. MITCHELL. Q. I hand you a paper bearing the printed heading of the Western Union Telegraph Company "Received - at." Is that a paper taken from the files of your ofllce? A. Yes. sir. it Is. Q. Was that telegram received by you at about the time it bears date? A. Yes. sir. Mr. Heney: We offer that in evidence. . Mr. Bennett: We object to this on the tame general ground, and. In addition, that no foundation has been made for the introduction of secondary testimony. Mr. Heney: This is one of the papers referred to in the notice. Will you pro duce the original? Same was admitted In evidence as Gov ernment's Exhibit 39. and read as follows: "Entries Passed to Patent." Washington. D. C. May 21. 1902. Hon. A. H. Tanner. Attorney-at-Law, Comcmrcial block. Portland. Oregon: The Secretary of the Interior has passed to patent all the timber entries which I wrote you had been sent up for approval, by the Commissioner some time since. , . JOHN' H. MITCHELL. Q. I hand you three sheets of papers purporting to be carbon copies of two let ters, both bearing date Mav 27. 1922. Were those papers taken from the flies of your office? A. Yes, those are copies of letters. Q. Were the originals of which these are carbon copies mailed by vou at about the date upon these copies, to Senator Mitchell? A. Yes. sir. Q. And signed by you. each of them? A. Yes, sir. Mr. Heney: We will offer them In evi dence. Mr. "Bennett: We object to the letter offered of May 27 in addition to the gen eral ground as being irrelevant and imma terial and having no reference to any matter In the indictment, and to the last clause of the second letter upon the same ground. The Court: If that Is the fact, the ob jection is well taken. The Witness: I think it relates to an other matter entirely. Mr. Heney: The first letter does. It may be marked at the present time as having been Identified as a carbon copy of a letter mailed at that date. As to the second letter. It Is admitted that It relates to the matter, except the last paragraph. Mr. Bennett: That Is all we make the special objection to. Mr. Heney: But If the letter Is compe tent at all it should all go in. and the last paragraph will be made competent later. The Court: Only the relevant parts of the paper arc proper. Mr. Heney: Then the second part of It we will reserve until later. Q. I will ask the witness now: It states here "In regard to tho enclosed lists, pay ments about which I enclose & separate letter." does that mean a letter which has been identified here, this one? A. Yes, I think it does. - Wanted More Expediting. Mr. Heney: We will read in evidence at this time only the first paragraph of the letter which Is marked Government's Ex hibit 41. as follows: May 27. 1902. Hon. John H. Mitchell. United States Sen ate. Washington. D. C: Dear Senator I was glad to receive your dispatch some days ago saving that the Honorable Secretary of the" Interior had passed to patent the timber entries In the Roseburg land district about which I havo been writing you. These lands are comprised in the three lists number 1. 2 and 3, which I sent you. and I presume have all been passed to patent We are entitled to an additional fee of JI00O in this matter; but I suppose the party will not want to pay until he has some evi dence of the final action in these cases, and I suggest, therefore, whether It would be proper or possible to get a letter or certificate from the Land Department cer tifying to the action taken in these cases or a notification to the local office of the action taken. This, no doubt, would be ultimately done, but you mlrht expedite the matter by calling the attention of the department to It. j. To that letter did you receive a re ply? A. I did. yes. Q. As to those two letters about which you have Just been questioned before, were they inclosed in the same envelope In mailing them? A. I suppose they were. yes. I have no recollection about It. but 1 suppose they were, being the same date. Q. And one referring to the other. A. Yes. sir. Q. This letter bears the signature of whom? A. Senator Mitchoil. Q. And was received by you Sn due course of mall about the time of the date It bears? A. Yes sir. Mr. Heney; We will offer this lR evi dence. The same was received In evidence as Government's Exhibit 1, and a portion of it only was read. Mr. Heney; I think the other portion bears on the other part of that letter, and I will not read it at this time. The portion read is as follows: Committee on Coast Defenses. United States Senate. Washington. D. C. June 2. 1332. Hon. A. H. Tanner, Attorney, Commercial Block. Portland. Oregon: My Dear Judge 1 beg to acknowledge receipt of yours of May 27, inclosing list of land selections In lieu. of forest reserve land surrendered in Vancouver land dis trict. State of Washington, up to June 4, 1897. Sincerely yours. JOHN H. MITCHELL. Q. Whose signature does the paper boar which is now handed you? A. This bears the signature of Senator Mitchell. 3. Was that letter received by you In due course of mall about the lime of the date It bears? A. It was; yes. sir. Mr. Heney: We will offer this letter In evidence. The same was received as Government's Exhibt 42 and read as follows: Asks Condition of Business. Committee on (J oast Defenses, United States Senate, Washington. D. C May 12. 1902. Hon. A. H. Tanner. Attorney-at-Law, Commercial Block; Portland. Oregon: My Dear Judge I beg to acknowledge receipt of yours of Mav 5. enclosing du plicate deposit tag on the Merchants Na tional Bank, to my credit, for $3f)-39. being my share of the proceeds of our business for the month of April, for which accept my thanks. Judge. I wish on receipt -of this. or. rather, I mean when you send me next months deposit, you would have your clerk make out a ttatement from the books of the firm showing the business since my leaving Oregon" In November last; giving an Itemized statement of cash received, irom whom, and on what ac count; in other words, a full statement of business up to June 1 of this year. Sincerely youra. JOHN H. MITCHELL. Q. I hand you a paper and ask you if that is a carbon copy of a letter mailed by you tb Senator Mitchell, kept on file In your office? A. Yes. It is. Q. Was that mailed at about the date It bears? A. Yes. Q. And signed by you? A. Signed by me, Q. Was the enclosure referred to there sent with It? A. Yes. It was. Mr. Heney: We offer this letter In evi dence. The same was received In evidence as Government's Exhibit 43, and read as fol lows: $737.55 for Mitchell In May. June 3. 1902. Hon. John H. Mitchell. V. S. Senate. Washington. D. C Dear Senator: En- for $727.15. being the amount of your share of the net proceeds of our business for the month of May. I also enclose you herewith a copy of our books from November to the present date, as per your request. I wrote you on the 27th. suggesting that you try and get a letter or something from the Secretary of the Interior show ing that the list of timber entries In the Roeeburg land district had been passed to patent as you wired me; but since writing that letter I have received your enclosure, being a copy of the opinion of the Sec retary of the Interior, which Is alt I will require In the matter. Have you any Idea yet when Congress will adjourn, or when you expect to be in Oregon. Very truly yours. Q. Did you receive a reply to that let ter? A. Yes. sir; I did. Q. Whose signature Is upon the paper which you now hold In your hand? A. That is the signature of Senator Mitchell, but It Is In the handwriting. I should Judge It la not In his own hand writing. Do you want to know whose It is In? ' Q. Yes. A. I think It is in the handwriting of Mr. Robertson. Q. Who was Mr. Robertson? A. He was the Sonator's clerk or secre tary. Q. Are there some initials after the sig nature? A. Yes. the Initials are H. C R. Q. Did you receive that letter in due course of mail about the date It bears? A. Yes, J did. Mr. Heney; We will have this letter Identified. Mr. Thurston: There is no objection to your reading It now. except the general objection. Mr. Heney: Then we will offer Jt In evi dence and rend it now. The amc was admitted in evidence as Government's Exhibit 44, and read as fol lows; Mitchell Sends His Thnnks. - Washington. D. C. June 9. IMS. Hon. A. H. Tanner, Attorney, Commercial Block: My Dear Judge I bqg to acknowledge receipt of yours of June 3. enclosing du plicate deposit tag to my credit on the Merchants National Bank for JiJT.iw. be ing the amount of my share of the pro ceeds of our business for the month of May: also a copy of our books from No vember up to the present date, for all of which accept my thanks. Hastily and sincerely, JOHN H. MITCHELL. (H. C. R.) Q. What book was the copy made from which was sent to Senator Mitchell? A. It was the copy of the daybook, being this book now handed me. Q. Is it the book that contains the en try which was offered In evidence on page 1. under date of February" 13, 1902. in relation to the employment and payment bv Fred A. Kribs of $T0O? Q. Was that entry Included In the copy sent? Objected to as secondary evidence? Q. Who made the copy of the books. Judge Tanner? A. I think Miss Spencer was the clerk In the office at that time. Q. You saw the copy which was mad? A. Yes. air. Q. And you know that It was a copy of the daybook? A. Yet., sir; I have a carbon copy of It In my ofllce. Q. I will ask you to produce that copy the next time you come on the witness stand. I hand you a paper marked Gov ernment's Exhibit 6. a check on the First National Bank of Roseburg. Whose in dorsement does that bear on the back? A. It bears the Indorsement of the "firm of Mitchell & Tanner. In my own hand writing. Q. Did you receive that check at about the date it bears? A. Yes. I did. Q. From whom? A. From Mr. Kribs. Q. For what purpose was it given to you? A. Let roe see the daybook. That pay ment relates to the timber claims, the lists 1. 2 and 3. about which I have al ready testified. Q. What did you do with the check after receiving it? A. It was deposited to the credit of the firm in the Merchants National Bank. Q. Was it collected? A. It was. yes. Q. Was the entry made in your books of the receipt of that money In your day book? A, Yes. sir. Q. It appears on page 159 of the book from which you have already been testi fying, docs It? A. Yes. sir. Q. At the top of the page? A. Yes. sir. Q. There Is an entry Immedlatelv un der It. which relates to the same trass action, does it? A. Yes. sir. Mr. Heney: We will offer both of these entries la evidence. EXTRACTS USEp BY PROSECUTION TO EMPHASIZE MITCHELL'S KNOWLEDGE Extracts from letters, telegrams and account books introduced In evidence by the prosecution to emphasize the knowledge on Senator Mitchell's part of the exact nature of Tanner and Mitchell's relationship to F. A. Kribs: Page 216 (Daybook.) February 1. IS. Fred. A. Kribs: To cash retainer In SECOND LIEU list of lands, and he to pay" $500 more when approved for patent. C00.CO. By cash. JS01OX Note The portion underscored in above" entry has been written over a very distinct erasure: It Is In Tanner's handwrltlpg. and was changed by him during the Puter trial, the original entry being "To cash retainer in S. a. D. Puter hst of lands." etc. A. H. Tanner To cash above amounts. SSCS.O); by deposit In bank, JoCO.CO. Statement showing how the net pro ceeds were divided for the month of February. 1WC, and that Mitchell received one-half of the $500 paid by Kribs: Total receipts. $1091.05: total disbursements. JIS4.73-J3JS3. A. H. Tarraer. to check No. 795. $163.87; John H. Mitchell to check. March 4. 1102. Tanner forwards to Mitchell, at Washington. D. C. duplicate deposit tag for $465.13. March W. 1932. Mitchell acknowledges receipt of Tanner's letter of March 4. as follows: "My Dear Judge I beg to acknowledge receipt of yours of March 4, enclosing duplicate deposit tag In Merchants National Bank, to my credit for $4GS.13. being my share of the proceeds of our business for the month of February, for which accept my thanks." March 14. lSCe. Tanner to 'Mitchell Refers to lists 1, 2. 3 (comprising about 70 timber and stone claims), and states: "The only thing I fear In the matter Is that there Is so much clamor and talk of fraudulent entries from this part of the country that the Honorable Commissioner may be Intimidated Into a refusal to pass these entries to patent. ... I trust you will give the matter your very best attention, and If he feels disposed to call a halt some where and hold up some entries of a similar character, he can miss these of OURS, as they affect Oregon people ... and are in no way tainted with fraud upon the law. "Please do not miss the opportunity of having a personal conference with the Honorable Commissioner about these lands, and represent and urge upon him. in the strongest manner possible, favorable action." March 21, 1902, Mitchell to Tanner Acknowledges Tanner's letter of March 14. and states: "I have not forgotten these matters, and am giving them my constant attention." April 19. Tanner to Mitchell Refers to Lists 1. 2 and 3, and says: "I wish to draw your attention to the fact, that one S. A. D. Puttr Is In some way Interested In List No. 3; he has no connection with the other two lists. -J am informed that he has started East, taking with him F. P. Mays, who will probably shortly turn up in Washington and endeavor to prevent List No. 3 from being passed for patent .. . . and try to get the list remanded for hearing In the local office so as to hold it over our pccple as. a club to try and force a settlement of the other matter. You probably know something of Mr. Puter, and I do not need to warn you as to the character of the man. ... I explain this situation to you so that If they should come there asking your assistance In the matter, you will understand that it refers to one of the lists of lands that I am interested In having passed to patent for the reasons which I have already explained to you. . . J April 22, 1S02 (telegram). Tanner to Mitchell "Puter and Mays there soon about list. Three timber entries. They arc hostile to intorcsts of my clients. Do nothing for them In matter. Mailed you letter on subject April 19th. explain ing situation." k April 29, 1902 (telegram). Mitchell to Tanner "On Saturday last Hermann reported to Secretary of Interior, I think, all of Rosburg land and stone cases In which you are Interested, with a. recommendation that they be ordered to patent. The case will be taken up before the Secretary of Interior and considered." MayS, 1902, Tanner to Mitchell f'l undcrstandfrom your dispatch of April 29th that all of. the lands Included In Lists 1. 2 and 3. being timber entries In the Roseburg Land 'Office, have been passed by the Honorable Commissioner to the Secretary of the Interior, with the recommendation that they be ordered to patent. An I correct In this? Lists 1. 2 and 3. you will remember, were the lands in which Mr. Kribs Is lnte-ested. and are all timber entries. Have you any idea when we may expect action on the part of the Secretary of the Interior on the matter?" May 9. 1HC, Mitchell to Tanner (telegram) "Cases before Eecretary will be all right In few days. Patents will Issue." May 21. IMS, Mitchell to Tanner (telegram) "iue Secretary of the Interior has rassed to patent all the timber entries which I wrote you bad been sent up for approval of the Commissioner sometime since" May 27. 1902; Tanner to Mitchell "I was glad to receive your dispatch some days ago saying that the hon orable Secretary of the Interior had. passed for patent the timber entries in the Roseburg land district, about which I have been writing you. These lends are comprised In tho three lists numbered 1. 2 and 3. which I sent you. and I presume, have all been passed for patent. We are entitled to an additional fee of $1000 in this matter," but 1 suppose the party will not want to pay until he has some evidence of the final action in these cases, and I suggest, therefore, whether it would be proper or possible to get a letter or certificate from the Land Depart ment certifying to the action taken in these cases or a notification to the local office of the action taken. This. IK) 'doubt, will be ultimately done, but you might expedite the matter by calling the attention of the depart ment to It." ... Note. May 12. 1C Mitchell asked Tanner to send him. when he sends next month's deposit, "a statement from the books of the firm, showing the business since my leaving Oregon In November last: giving an itemized statement of cash received from whom, and on what account; in other words, a full statement of business up to June 1. up to this year." June 3. IMS Tanner encloses the deposit tag for May, 1KC. and 5727.53, and encloses copy "of our book3 from November to the present date, as per your request," States that he wrote him on May 27. asking to get a letter or something from the Secretary of the Interior showing that the list of timber entries had been passsd to patent as Mitchell wired him. "but since writing that letter I have received your lnclosures. being a copy of the opinion of the Secretary of the Interior, which is all I require in the mattor." June 9. 1902; Mitchell to Tanner Acknowledges receipt of Tanner's letter of June 3, Inclosing deposit tag and "copy of our; book from November up to- the present date." This statement was made from the daybook, which contained the Kribs entry of February 13. Final payment by Kribs on thls-1. 2 and 3. June 14, IMS FrSd A. Kribs. By cash for services and advice, in reference to timber lands, purchased In Roseburg ... flOM. This payment was made by check dated June 14, IMC, on the First National Bank of Roseburg. It was deposited In the Merchants' National Bank. June 11. 1S02, to the credit of "Mitchell & Tanner." The amount was equally divided at the next division of net proceeds. July 3. 1903. and Mitchell received half of the $Ktt) In his half of the net proceeds, which was J739.CS. and which was deposited to hl3 credit In the Merchants National Bank, July 5, 1132. Tanner forwards -deposit tag July 7. 1902. and Mitchell acknowledges it July 19. l.H- This JKXO was the balance, of the fee from Kribs from this 1, 2 and 3, $000 due on this 1 asd 2. and $S due on this No. 3. June 26. 190!; Tanner to Mitchell Forwards list No. 6, lieu selections: "I desire furthermore to add that Mr. Kribs has paid up the fee which he was to pay for the services In the matter of the timber-land entries la the Roseburg Land OEJce. . Kribs Heu selections April 30. 150C Tanner to-Mitchell Forwards "Kribs No. 4" list (lieu selections. States that he Is to get a fee for "getting thejnformatlon desired In these cases." "I would- like to get the present rtatus of the cases, and also have them made special so that you may be notified of any step taken therein and of any defects or omls3lons which we may have to correct or supply. I Inclose you also a copy of this Hrt and havo marked It, "Kribs No. 3, so that In our subsequent correspondence you will know the list re ferred to by that name and number." ... February 16. 1902 Tanner to Mitchell (3 letters) (1) Forwards "Kribs list No. 5" of lieu selections. This Includes S3 selections. In which C A. Smith, of Minneapolis. Is Interested, as well as the estate of John 'A. Plllsbury. (2) Inclose affidavit from Kribs asking to amend selection 373S. Included In said list. (3) States that he forwards separate letters relating to Kribs affidavit in re-selection 37SS. and list of lieu selection's. (5) "I desire furthermore to add that Mr. Kribs .has paid up the fee which he was to pay for the cervices In the matter of the, timber land entries In the Roseburg Land Office." June 21, 1932 Mitchell to Tanner (2 letters) (1) Acknowledges Tanner's letter of June 15, inclosing affidavit of Kribs In re-selectlon 379S. (2) Acknowledges Tanner's better of Juno 16, Inclosing list of lieu selections (5) asd states he will "endeavor to have action taken as soon as possible." approved) JK By cash ISO). Sections Page 170 (daybook). September 20. 1M2. Frederick A. Kribs. To services and advice In reference to forest lieu nelections list 4 and 5 ($300 more to bo paid when said selections were approved.4 $600 By cash KX). Kribs drew this check to the order of "A. H. Tanner," but It was deposited Sep tember 22. IMC, to the credit of "Mitchell & Tanner" in the Merchants National Bank. The amount was equally divided at the next division of net proceeds, October 3, 1992, and Mitchell's portion, $457.23, deposited to his credit in the Merchants National Bank. November 11. 1902 Tanner to Mitchell f2 letters) 0) Forwards list (1) to Mitchell again, and states that he hopes there is nothing now In the way of favorable action. (2) To this letter Is attached the following "rider": "I hone you will punch the matter "up all you can, as part of our fee depends upon getting these se lections approved." Second payment on lieu selections October 10. 1S04 (Journal page 5). Fred A. Kribs, by cash. $3; by re- raltted on bill, 520; by cash on account of list No. 5, $200. Nojjr-Kribs drew this check to the order of Mitchell &. Tanner, October 5, 1904. on the Merchants' National Bank. A. H. Tanner To cash above amounts. SJSSJ by deposited in bank, 165. "Note Tanner 'retained 7100 of the above payment, but the amount was charged to him at the next division of the net proceeds on November 2. 1904. and Mitchell received one-half of the J200 check of Kribs. Mitchell's share of the net proceeds for October, 1504. was T534.S3. and the amount was deposited to his credit In the Merchants" National Bank, on November 3, 1904. Mr. Bennett: The some general objec tion goes to all these. The entries were read in evidence as follows: Portland, Oregon, June 12, 1902. Kribs Paid $1000. 14 Fred A. Kribs by cash for services and advice In reference to timber land purchases In Ropcburg district. $1(00. A. H. Tanner, to cash above amount. JK09. Q. The second entry means that you received it? A. Yes. sir. Q. Does -the fourth entry relate to the same transaction' en part? A. Yes. sir; that includes the $1M0. Q. That Includes that thousand dollars? A. Yes. sir. Mr. Heney: We will offer the fourth Thurston: It Is simply an entry that he receives It and then charges It to himself. Mr. Heney: Yes, receives It and depos its It In the bank and credits It to the firm. The Court: The same character of en tries as the others? Mr. Heney: Yes. The court thereupon admonished tht Jurv and a recess was taken until 2 o'clock P. M. AFTERXOON SESSION. Tanner Continncs to Testify. Direct examination of A. H. Tanner, continued. Mr. Heney: We will now offer in evidence the last entry to which I called your attention Just as court adjourned, on page 163 of the daybook. "A. H. Tanner to cash above amount. $50.00. "By deposited in bank, $1150.00" Q. I will show you the daybook of the firm of Mitchell & Tanner, from which you have been testifying, and call vour attention to the entries commenc ing on page 160. and going over onto page 161. and ask you whe'her or not the receipts for the month of June. 1902, were divided, and if so. when? xA. They were. yes. sir; July 3, 1902. Q. Was the entry of that division put In the firm books? A. Yes, sir; on page 161 of the day book. Q. In whose handwriting does It ap pear? A. That Is- In the handwriting of Miss Spencer, the clerk In our office at that time. Q. Did you see the entry at about the time it was made? A. Yes. sir. Q.- Was it made at or. about the time of: the date it bears? . A. It was; yes, sir. Mr. Heney: We will offer that entry In evidence. Portland. Oregon. July 3. 1983. Paid following bills by C. K.: Irwin. Hodson & Co.. No. S33. $19.80. and then scratched oui; Pacific Monthly. No. S34, $1.50: Pacifife States TeL Co.. No. S35; $10.70: Guide Publishing Co.. No. 836, $1.00; office rent. 150.00; A. C. Spender. No. 840. $30.00. Total expenditures Is added as $93.20. Total receipts. $1720.00. Total disbursements, $159.00. Net cash. $1561.00. A. H. Tanner to one-half net cash. $750.50. Expense. $1.50; less one-half amount overdrawn as shown by bank book. A. H. Tanner's proportion being J 10.06 more than J. H. Mitchell's. S5L42. Parried out In the column. $730.58. John H. Mitchell to one-half net caslK S7S0.50; less one-half amount overdrawn as shown by bank book. J. H. Mitchell's proportion being $10.00 less than A. H. Tanner's account, $41.42; carried out in the column. $739.0$. Q. Does the" net cash there $1561.00 Include the thousand-dollar check represented by Government's Exhibit No. 6? A. Yes. sir; it does. Mitchell Paid One-llalf of (Thcck. Q. And does the portion of the net cash charged to John H. Mitchell in clude one-half of that check? A. Yes. -sir. Q. Did you pay to John H, Mitchell the one-half which Is charged against him here in the book. July 3. 1902. for the month of June, and if so. in what way was it paid? I can refresh your memory. A. I was trying to think whether he was here or not or in Washington. Q. I will show you a carbon copy of a letter. A. That amount wars paid to him in the way I have already explained with reference to those other payments. The firm's check was drawn payable to my order for his amount and turned into the Merchants National Bank and deposited to bis credit. A duplicate de posit tag was taken for it in his name, which was forwarded to him by this letter of July 7. 1902. Q. Carbon copy of which you have In vour hand? A. Yes. v Q. And the original of that you mailed to him on or about that date, did you? A. Yes. sir; I did. Q. And you say it was deposited to his credit. Do you mean In the name of John H. Mitchell, trustee?- A. Yes. sir. This same account John H. Mitchell. trustee Mr. Heney: We will offer this letter in evidence. The same was received in evidence as Government's Exhibit 45, and read as follows: "July 7, 1902. "Hon. John H. Mitchell, L. S. Senate, Washington, D. C. "Dear Senator: Enclosed I hand you duplicate deposit tag for $739.08, being your share of the proceeds of our busi ness for the month of June. "Very truly yours." Q. I hand you what purports to be a letter dated July 19. 1902. Whose signa ture is upon the paper. If you know? A. That Is the Senator's signature. Q. Did you receive that letter in due course of mall, about the time of the data It bears? A. Yes. I did. Mr. Heney: I will offer that letter In ' evidence. The same was received in evidence as Government's Exhibit 45, and read as follows: Receives $739.05 for June. Washington. D. C. July 19, 1902. Hon. A. H. Tanner, Attorney. Commer cial Block. My Dear Judge: jOn my re turn here after ten days absence on a vacation I find yours of July 7. inclosing duplicate slip In my name, for J733.CS. being my share of the proceeds of our business for the month of June, for which accept my thanks. The President has turned Dufur down, and I find it will be impossible to do anything for him. all of which Is an out rage. Sincerely your friend. JOHN H. MITCHELL. Q. I now hand you three sheets of paper, letter slse. ail bearing date June 16, 1902. and ask you if those are carbon copies of letters taken from the flies of your office? A- Yes. those are copies of letters I sent, Q. Did you mail the original of each of those sheets to Senator Mitchell on or about the date these sheets bear? A. Yes I did. Q- Each of the originals was signed by you? 'A. Yes. sir. Mr. Heney: We will offer these In evf-dencc.- The same are received in evidence as Government's Exhibits 47. 47a and 47b, and were read in evidence as follows: More Kribs Business. June If, 1S02 Hon. John H. Mitchell. U. S. Senate. Washington. D. C Dear Senator: I en close you separate letters pertaining to the affidavit made by Mr. Kribs asking leave to amend, an application for forest Heu land selections, and also a list of forest lieu land selection la order that you may forward the letters with the matters to- which thejr pertain to the Honorable Commissioner and give the matters such attention as you can. I desire furthermore to add that Mr. Kribs has paid up the fee which he was to pay for the services in the matter of the timber land entries in the Roseburg Land Office, which were ordered passed to patent by the Honorable Secretary of" the Interior. He has considerable money tied up In those lands and is of course exceedingly anxious to have patents Is sued, as he cannot get his money out until patents have been Issued, as they no doubt will be in due course of bU3l- aess. If there Is any way you can ex pedite the issuance of patents in these cases, I wish you would do so. and have them forwarded to the local office for delivery. Very truly yours. P. S- The copy of lieu-land selections enclosed is for you to keep, so as to keep track of this list. A. H. T. Two letters are enclosed which urge prompt action on both matters referred to in the foregoing letter. Q. I hand you Government's Exhibit 9 and ask you if that is the list referred to In your letter of June 16, 1902. the last one read? There Is a mark of some kind on the back of it. . A. Yes. sir. 1 think that Is the list. Q. In whose handwriting is that? A. It is In my handwriting. This Is No. 5. Q. I think you have already identified Government Exhibit 3 on the back of it. the Indorsement, as being In your hand writing? A. Yes. sir. Mr. Heney: We neglected to offer the back ot it in evidence, which we do now. The same was marked Government's Exhibit 3a. Q. And Government Exhibit 6 I be lieve you have already identified the in dorsement of Mitchell and Tanner on the back as la your handwriting? A. Yes. sir. Mr. Heney: We offer the back of that check in evidence. The same is marked Government's Ex hibit 6a. Q. Did you find the stub book contain ing the stub of the check for the division of the money that was received by the firm for the month of October, 1901? A Yes. sir. I have it here, Q. That is the division which appears on page 134 of the daybook, which Is al ready In evidence. Does this stub book contain a check showing that division? A. Yes. the checks were returned by the bank to the firm. In due course of business, after being paid and were pasted back onto the stub so as to keep them Identified with the stub In that way. Q. The amount of the division as charged to John H. Mitchell In the day book Is $4S5.S3. Will you explain from this stub book in what manner that amount was paid to him? A. It was paid In two separate checks: one check wa3 made payable to H. E. Mitchell for $100: that is the Senator's son; and the other check was made pay able to the Senator, for $3S5.S3. Q. Can you state from examining that whether or not Senator Mitchell was in Portland at that time? Mitchell Indorses Check. A- I should judge from the fact that he has Indorsed this check, and that it was made payable to him personally, that he must have been here at that time, though I have no recollection about It. Q. You have no Independent recollec tion? A. No. Q. Mr. Thurston: What is the date of that check? A. November 2. Q. I will call your attention to the In dorsements upon the back of the check of $100 to H. E. Mitchell. Do you know whose signature that bears? A. That Is the signature of H. E. Mitchell; yes. sir. Q. You are familiar with his handwrit ing? A. Yes, sir. Q. I call your attention to a check drawn In favor of John H. Mitchell for $3S3.S3. Whose signature la on the back of that check? A. That is the Senator's signature, John H. Mitchell. Q. By whom were those checks filled out. In -whose handwriting? A. They are in the handwriting of H. C. Robertson. Q. What position, if any. was he oc cupying with the firm of Mitchell & Tan ner at that time? A. He was the clerk or stenographer in the office. Q. Who signed the firm name of Mitch ell & Tanner to the check of H. E. Mitch ell? A. That Is in my handwriting. I signed that myself. Q. Who signed the one to John H. Mitchell? A. I did. Q. Did yon see the entries In the stub at about the time those entries were made? A. Yes, Q. In whoso handwriting are they? A. They are In the handwriting of Mr. Robertson. Q. Were they made at about the time of the date they bear? A. Yes. Mr. Heney: We will offer both of the stubs and the checks In evidence. They were read In evidence as follows: The stub entry at the top Li No. 742. date November 2. 1901. To H. E. Mitchell for account John H. Mitchell. $100. The check: Portland. Oregon. November 2. 1901. No. 742. Merchants National Bank. Pay to the order of H. E. Mitchell $100 (one hundred dollars). Signed, Mitchell & Tanner. The Indorsement on the back of that check is H. E. MItchelL A perforated stamp. "Paid. Merchants National Bank. Paid. Portland, Oregon." Stamped on with purple Ink. Mr. Bennett: I think It ought to be un derstood that these checks do not refer to any matter that is charged In the Indict ment. They are so Intimately connected, being a part of the same transaction, that it does not seem to us that the same rule applies as to these other matters, and therefore we have made no special objec tion: but it seems to me the Jury ought to understand that this la not a matter that Is charged in the indictment. Mr. Heney: This Is the first payment of $500 on the contract of October 15, 1901. The second payment Is February 19. 1902, and that is the second payment of the first one alleged In the indict ment. The date of the return of the In dictment shows that the statute of lim itations would have run against this particular payment at. the time the In dictment was turned In. Xot Included In fhe Indictment. Mr. Bennett: You do not claim that this Is Included in the Indictment? Mr." Heney: No, it is not included in the indictment. The stub to the other check reads: Jib. 743. Date. Nov. 2. 1901. To John H. Mitchell. $385.83, one-half net cash. $481.33. Expense. $4.50. Less check to H. E. Mitchell for $100,000. The check reads: Portland. Oregon. November 2. 1901. No. 743. Merchants' National Bank pay to the order of John H. Mitchell $385.83. three hundred and eighty-five and 83-100 dollars. Mitchell and Tanner. Endorsement on the back. John H. Mitchell. Q. I will ask you if you received an answer to the letter of June 16. 1902. which has Just been read in evidence, consisting of three sheets? A. Yes, sir; that is the answer I re ceived. Q. There were three separate sheets each dated the same- date. Can you say whether or not they were all mailed in the same envelope? A. I expect they were, though I have no recollection on the subject. Mr. Heney: We will offer this letter in evidence. The same was received in evidence as Government's Exhibit 48, and read as follows: Received Kribs AfTadavlt. Committee on Coast Defenses, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. June-2I. 1902. Hon. A. H. Tanner, Attorney at LaHv, 809 Commercial Block. Portland, Oregon. My Dear Judge: I beg to acknowl edge receipt of yours of June 16th. en closing affidavit of F. A. Kribs. in which he makes application to be allowed to amend the application so as to make the same in the name of F. A. Hyde, for lands in lieu of those conveyed to the United States by power of attorney. This relates to Lieu Selection No. 3798. I will bring the matter to the attention of the Department at once, with the recommendation that the per mit be allowed. Yours verv sincerely. JOHN H. MITCHELL. Q. I hand you what purports to be a letter dated June 21. 1502. Whose signa ture. If you know, docs that paper bear? A. That is the signature of Senator Mitchell. Q." Was that letter received by you in due-courre of mail about the time of the date It bears? A. Yes, sir. It was. . r - Mr. Heney: We will offer this litis evidence. The same was received in evidMM Government's Exhibit No. 49, and 'rmm follows: Washington. D. C, June 3. nan. a. 1. Tanner. Attorney-i 603 Commercial Block. Portland. Ore My Dear Judge: I beg to acknoi recelDt Of vours Of Junn 16. pnHrw list of lieu selections, all at Rosel wnicn you say were Med with the Gel Land Office about two vears azo as which nothing has yet been heard. you ass mat 1 get tne same made sj if nosslble. I will brinir tha same to the attmt of the department at once and end to nave action taken as soon as poi Yours very sincerely. JOHN H. MITCHELL. W. iiia you nna the carbon copy of ti daybook of the firm from Nov-nbt 1901. to June. 1902. which was referr ? in tne letter or June 3. 1902. that was In evidence? A. Yes. sir. I have the copy here. J icasi i suppose it 10 De a copy, it is carbon copy. I do not remember that compared it with the books, but It ws mnae Dy -uiss spencer. Q. And kept on file in the office since? A. Yes, sir. Q. You saw it at that time? A. Yes. sir. ' Mr. Henev: We will havi Mis SriM here later on, and If you are willing. me 10 go on witn tne agreement tr will have her Identify it as th& con the ens made by her, we will put ii evidence now. ' Mr. Bennett: No, we do not standi teat. Mr. Heney: We will offer the copy evidence. Mr. Eennett: I sunnose the same ml would apply to this as to the origrnJ book, mat it has nothing to do with it"? matter. It covers private transactions of tne nnn rcr quite a long time. The Court: Of course, the matter Is really material consists of those p1" tlcular entries. Mr. Heney: Yes. that is the materia matter, but it is necessary to put the whole thing in as being the paper that was sent, and we will read only the mate rial tarts. The Witness: Of course, there are great many entries that have no Tefereac to this matter at all. Mr. Heney; We will read that portion, only which Is In controversy here. Mr. Bennett: I suppose, then, thit ! the only matter, then, that will be in evi dence? Tends to Show His Knowledge, Mr. Heney: No. I offer the whole pa tha nlioitlnn V.o t in itvrv nrlll VaaVA determine Is whether from the receipt this paper they can Infer that Sena VritoVioll'a nftantlnn Tl-93 raUprf tt i matter, wnicn win aepena somewnat u the appearance of the paper and how" cmry appears niereui. The Court: Well, I think It is not nec sary to read It at this time. itr, Heney. o, omy mat one entry. The Court: But let the whole matter introduced and counsel can make si comments on it as tney desire to in a read" the one" entry, but the jury should" nave tne rignt to inspect me ppper iur themselves. The Court: That is true, they have that right, but It Is hardly necessary to read, the entire paper, unless counsel Insist upon It. Mr. Heney: No, I am only going to read the one entry at this time. Mr. Bennett: May It please Your Honor, If I may be heard on this matter. It seem to me it stands exactly as the books did". n ...7 I. 1 tin mnr-A that thft. 1llTV should have these entries In relation Jjj. these parties' private business In this fpai than ft was that they should have ItHn tho books. It seems to me that the cntri referring to this matter are the only ons that are material. Suppose the whole books had been sent along; would that have made them material? The Court: I am sure I have not ths remotest Idea what use counsel is going to make of those Irrelevant matters. I sug gest that the attention of the jury bs called to those matters that are relevant, to this case. If the lnegrlty of the doc-1 ment Is attacked during the trial and It becomes necessary to put the entire paper in evidence, you can do that. Mr, Hcncy: I only Intend to call the attention of the jury to the particular items relating to this; but In argument I propose to show the Jury the document, and let them Inspect it for themselves and see what the probability or nonprob ablllty Is of the person who received it having noticed those particular entries. The court: Let me see the document; We might as well have It settled now, what goes In evidence. It seems 4o me the only material matter in It Is that which relates to those particular entries that have been Introduced In evidence. X cannot conceive of anj other use that can be made of the paper. Mr. Heney: There is not other use that counsel desire to make of the paper. ir Your Honor pleases. But It I wanted ta introduce that entry in the books- th court would be entitled to see the entire book for the purpose of determining the amount ot weight to give to the entry, and the Jury, it seems to me. are entitled to see the paper which contains the en try for the purpose of determining how much weight to give it. as a circumstance tending to show that the party who re ceived It had knowledge that this entry was there In the books. The court: You have the testimony of the witness that this Is a copy of th books that was called for by the de fendant, and that It contains the particu lar entries which you have introduced In evidence. I cannot understand how any other part of that document Is relevant. I do not understand that the entire busi ness of that firm is to be exposed to the mV. Heney: I have not looked up this particular question. If Your Honor pleases, but a very eminent lawyer in Los Angeles who recently tried a case that was brought against some public of ficer for embezzlement Insisted upon the trial of a case In which I was taking part a week or two later against him. that the only way that an entry could be put In evidence was by putting the whole of the book In evidence, and n said they had threshed out that question In that case. . . The court: I think he was wrong about It, unless there is some suspicion casf upon the book or the document itself. Mr. Heney: That was my own impres sion. As to this particular paper, 'how ever, I think a different rule applies, even though It was the whole book. However, the only part we desire to read. The court: I think the examination should be confined to the particular en tries, especially in a trial of this kind, so that we shall not get into the case anything more than properly belongs there. Seeks to Show Knowledge. Mr. Heney: -In order for the Jury to determine the purpose of putting this In Is to show the probability it Is a cir cumstance tending to show and if not, it is not competent at all that the de fendant had knowledge of the fact that this money was received from Kribs. Having received this paper, he may or may not have read it, but as to whether he saw that entry or not, something might depend upon whether it isat the top of the first page or the middle ot the last page or In an obscure place. The court: Tou can show the Jury that entry as It Is there. Mr. Bennett: We are willing the whole paper shall go in for that purpose; with the understanding that these private mat ters are not to be commented upon. Mr. Heney: Oh, I will not comment up on any private matter that does not go in evidence. I read from page 7, and it Is tho third and fourth entries. The heading of the page Is "Portlands Oregon. February 4, 1902." I think you will and that it is an exact copy of the page of the book. It starts Just belowythe last settlement. "Fred A- Kribs tocash re tainer In S. A. D. Puter llet of lands, he to pay $500 more when approved for pat ent. $300. By cash $300. A H. Tanner to cash above amounts. $506." (There te a $6 entry Just above.) "By deposited in bank, $30S."' "Now, I want the Jury to look at the entry. The entries were exhibited to the jury and the paper marked Government's Ex hibit. No. 50. Mr. Heney: The entries upon page Z of the division following, that being: the first entry on the page,, we also jead In evidence: Portland. Or. February 3, 1902. Tha date la evidently a mistake and should be Marcn. 3. The preceding, entry Is March 3, ' and- the preceding entries containing the date would have to go In evidence in order to show that mis take. Portland. Or... February 3; 102, Paid the following bills by check.