Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Morning Oregonian. (Portland, Or.) 1861-1937 | View Entire Issue (June 27, 1905)
;jLJtli5 JJlUltlli UKJSGO'IA, TLESUAX, JLJNJB XI, 1WO, HARRY C. ROBERTSON IS A STRONG WITNESS FOR PROSECUTION 10 (Continued From Pint rage.) the Government tried to show by Judge Tanner that the firm received each month a large fee as a. salary from a corpora tion. It -was argued by Mr. Heney that If this testimony was allowed it would be possible to show that there was a steady income. Reasoning from inference there fore it could be argued that when large monthly dividends came in to Senator Mitchell It would be natural for him to Inquire concerning the Increase In the JJrm business. The court, however, refused to allow the Government to have the evi dence. Arthur Orton. a bookkeeper at the Merchants National Bank. Identified a certified copy of the bank accounts of Mitchell & Tanner and of John H. Mitchell, trustee, as found on the books of the bank. The exhibits were admitted In evidence. J. T. Bridges, formerly of the Rose bJrg Land Offics. was called for a min ute to testify concerning the Krlbs claims at the time they were filed upon, and then Harry C. Robertson, the ex-private eecrctary to Senator Mitchell, was called upon the stand by the Government- 'Rob ertson was a strong witness for the prose cution, and did not spare his former pa tron and friend in telling the story he had to tell. All efforts upon the part of the defense to break him down In cross examination failed, though it was able to set out in the testimony of T. O. Ab bott, of Seattle, that Robertson had stated It as his belief that Senator Mitch ell was innocent of crime, though upon the stand Robertson denied ever having made the remark. The witness after telling of his early connection with the firm of Mitchell & Tanner and of his emplos'ment by Sen ator Mitchell, said that he had written the original partnership agreement of 1901 at the dictation of A. H. Tanner. The witness had also se?n Krlbs In the firm office time and again. Continuing, Mr, Robertson identified the receipt which he had given for the copy of the firm books sent to the Senator, at his request, and also Identified the copy as the one he had received. . After the Senator had looked over the books, the witness said, he wanted a copy cf the partnership agreement. About this time the witness had received a sub pena to appear before the grand jury, and he asked the Senator why they should want him as a witness. He had taken the summons to Mitchell and asked him wlij he had been subpenacd. and the Ftnatnr had said he supposed It was about the firm books. The Senator told the witness that Tanner had been before the Jury and had testified that the agreement of 1501 gave all of the fees earned before the departments to himself and not to Mitchell. The Senator- said that he and Tanner had talked the matter over and that he thought any means Justifiable In defeating the assaults of the unnamable p pie who were persecuting him. The witness did not want to go to Port land, but Mitchell told him to go and to be sure and see Tanner the first thing, get a look at the amended agreement and have Tanner tell him how to testify eo that their stories would hitch. One day. after Robertson had been sub renaed. Mitchell had read him a telegram saying that Tanner and his son were threatened with indictment and wanting t know wlat Harry said. The witness tolrt the Senator that Tanner was a Hamed fool to send such a message over the wire. February 10 Robertson had rrarhed Portland to appear before the grand jury. He hnd gone direct from the train to the Hotel Portland, eaten Ms breakfast and reported at once to te ofllce of the United States District Attorney. He had brought the letter to Tanner with him. but had left It at the hotel In his grip. Knowing that Tanner " "would try to influence him to perjure nimself and fearing that he would not be strong enough to resist, the witness had put off the delivery of the letter until after he had given his testimony. now Heney Got the Letter. Mr. Heney. however, had, after the ses sion with, the Jury, asked him If he had seen Tanner, and he had replied that he was about to go up to deliver a letter he had brought. Upon this Heney said he would allow the witness to go to the hotel for dinner, but that he would have him escorted back to the Juryroom by an officer and would take the letter away from him. That was the way the Gov ernment had secured possession of the letter, not through his voluntary surren der of it. Robertson had returned to Washington about February IS and had met the Sen ator He had remarked upon the meet ing that there seemed to be more trouble, upon which Mitchell became angry and Fwore at him. saying that Robertson and Tanner had entered Into a conspiracy to ruin him. and that they were helping the prosecution. Robertson tendered his resignation and the Senator said he would think of It Then he asked the witness if he had seen a copy of the genuine agreement, and if it contained the clause about the departmental practice. Rob ertson said the document contained the clause, and the Senator swore at him again, shook his fist in his face and said it was a mass of lies. The Senator broke down In discussing the agreement and cried, saying they ought not to prose cute him. as he only got some small checks out of the transactions; The witness said the Senator made a statement to the press, but that he had t Id him it was too strong and ought f be changed. Mitchell sent every one out of the room and asked why the state ment was wrong. Robertson advised him not to make any statement at all. as both knew Kribs to have been a client of the firm. The Senator shook his fist at his private, secretary again and told him he was a liar, that it was all a lie. and he would swear to It on a stack of a thousand Bibles. Afterwards he admitted that he had known Kribs and changed the statement. Cross-Exnmlnntlon Is Severe. Senator Thurston cross-examined the witness and handled him severely. He dwelt upon his service for the Senator and tried to make the witness admit that he had lied to Mitchell about the delivery of the letter Into the hands of the Gov ernment, and In other things, but he was unsuccessful. The witness denied having been met by any Government officials upon his arrival In Portland to go before tle jury, and said he had done every thing of his own volition. Senator Mitchell and Representative iiliamson. the witness declared, had tried to make him give them a written statement of his actions while In Port land, of those whom he had seen and the conversations held, but he had refused to violate his oath. The Government closed Its case at 2:45 o clock and the defense "was commenced. T O. Abbott, a lawyer of Seattle; W. H. Odell. of Salem; J. P. Fullerton. of Rose burg. A. D. Sttllman, of Pendleton; Will iam D. Wheelwright and T. B. Wilcox, of Portland, were called as witnesses to show that the Senator did not charge for his services before the departments and that he had repeatedly refused fees when offered. Each of the witnesses had at me time or another received valuable aid from the Senator in advancing claims before the departments for them and in each case when liberal fees had been of fered the defendant had refused them with show of Impatience. It is thought that the Senator will be placed upon the stand this morning, or before the defense is ended, though no statement will be made by the attorneys. It Is expected that the case will go to the Jury by Wednesday night at the latest FULIr STENOGRAPHIC REPORT June 26. 1905. 10 o'clock A. M. Court met pursuant to adjournment Arthur W. Orton was called as a witness for the-Government and sworn. Be testified that he was employed In HARRY ROBERTSON THE PRINCIPAL WITNESS YESTERDAY AT THE MITCHELL TRIAL, EX-SENATOR THURSTON AND SENATOR MITCHELL AS SKETCHED DURING THE TESTIMONY the Merchants National Bank of Port land, and ne identified copies of the accounts of the firm of Mitch oil A Tan ner and John H. Mitchell, as kept in that bank, and the copies were admit ted In evidence over the objection of the defendant, the copies being treated as the original books. A. H. Tanner was recalled and Iden tified some additional checks of the firm which had been Issued to the de fendant, and those checks were read In evidence, and some that hud alroaJy been read in evidence heretofore, but not marked as exhibits, were now re ceived and marked. i The witness also testified that he did not see Harry Robertson In Feb ruary, before the latter testified be fore the grand Jury, but the witness knew that Robertson had boon before the grand Jury before he pleaded guilty to the indictment of perjury Sure Regarding; Entries. On cross-examination. Mr." Tanner testified tnat he was quite sure t.ie de fendant Imd made none of the entries In the firm books during the years 1961-2-3, which have been Inquired into; that the checks which he testi fied were given to tne defendant were the checks of the firm, and were for the balance due the defendant for the' firm business generally. Joseph T. Bridges was sworn as a witness In behalf of the Government and testified that from 1901 to Novem ber. 1904. he was register of the LanJ Office at Roseburg. and ho Identified the various lists of lands heretofore In troduced as lands which were open to entry at tne time the selections were filed. On cross-examination, the wit ness testified as to the difference b$r tween the proceedings at tho date of entry and at the date of final proof, and us to the procedure generally in mak ing application for entries of timber land. Robertson a Witness. Harry C. Robertson, sworn on part of the Government, testified as fol lows; Direct examination by Mr. Heney; Q. How old are yon, Mr. Rob-rt- 80117 A. Q. A. Q. I am 53. Where were you bora? . Missouri. 1 Did you ever live In Oregon? I aave lived here infest of the A. time since 1S90. Q. Were you in the employ of the firm of Mitchell & Tanner at any time? A. I was in the employ of Mitchell & Tanner from some time in August, 1S91, almost continually up until 1901. Q. At what time in 1901 did you ceae to be In the employ of the firm? A. 1 coaled to be in the employ of firm. I think, about the th of March, 1901. although I continued to do their work until the time I went to Wash ington, in November, 1901. Q. Have you been employed In any capaclt3' with tne defendant here. John H. Mitchell; if ao, what, with him in dividually? A. Of course. I was In his employ while I was in the firm, and 1 have also been his private secretary from March, 1901. up to the 19th of March of this year. Q. Are you a shorthand reporter? A. I write shorthand, but I do not claim to be rh expert reporter. Q. What were your duties while you were with Senator Mitchell? A. I did his work as private secre tary, handling his correspondence, do ing shorthand and typewriting. i. Do you remember the day. the time of nts election to the Senate In March. 1901? Tlint Partnership Agreement. A. Yes sir; 1 was present at the time. Q. About that time did you have any thing to do with the preparation of a partnership agreement? I wiH show you Government's Exhibit 1 for inspection. Did you have anything to do with the preparation of that particular paper? A. I typewrote that yea. sir. Q. In what way did you get the mate rial from which you typewrote it? A. Dictated to me by Judge Tanner. Q. Where was that? A. In Mitchell & Tanaer's office in this city. Q. When was it that you typewrote that, or about when? A. I think it was perhaps about the 4 th of March. 1961. somewhere along there; the 3d or 4th. Q. Do you know the signature of Jo ha H. Mitchell and Albert H. Tanner? A. Yes. I know their signatures very well; those are their signatures there. Q. How many originals were executed. If you know, at the time? A. There were two originals. Q. Subsequent to the execution of the originals, did you ever see either one of th.em? I mean did yon prior to the time you appeared here In February. 1906. be fore the grand Jury? A. Why. yes. 1 nave seen them, why certainly, on several occasions. Q. "When was the first time after the preparation of this agreement, that you saw one of the originals? A. I think It was in July. 1903. I may have seen them other times, and perhaps did. but 1 am sure 1 saw it then. Q. What did you do in July. 1903. If anything with reference to this agreement that makes you sure that you saw it then? Makes Typewritten Copy. A. Well 1 know In 193 while we were out here, that the Senator had mislaid or did not have It at the time, and asked me if I could get Tanner's copy of it for him. and I got It and after looking it over, bo asked mc to make a typewritten copy; that he had mislaid his. That is the reason I remember of seeing it, and getting this copy of Tanner's. Q. Where was this? A. That was in Mitchell & Tanner's office. Q. At the time you made that copy did you run off more than one copy? A. Yes. I made two copies. I made a carbon copy and an original in typewrit ing. y. Have you the carbon copy? A. This is the carbon copy I made at lh time, ves. sir. Q. What did you do with that carbon copy after making It? A. 1 made two; I made the original and this carbon and gave one to the Sen ator. We compared them with this origi nal, read them over together to see if It was correct and 1 gave him the origi nal, the ink copy, and I kept the carbon copy and carried It back and forth with me so that If he should lose this one he would have another one. Mr. Heney: "We offer"- this copy in evidence- Objected to as Irrelevant and lmmate rial. Overruled: defendant excepts. The same was admitted as Govern ment's Exhibit 106. and Is Identical with the original agreement which has here tofore been set out In full. Q. Were you here in Portland In Oc tober, 1981? A. Yes. sir. Q. Did you at that time meet Fred erick A. Kribs? A. Yes. sir: I have seen him In the office at that time, in the month of Octo ber. 1901 Snw Krlbs With Mitchell. Q. Did you ever see him In the private office, or did you at that time see him in the private office of John H. Mitchell? A. I did. yes. Q. Was Senator Mitchell in there at the time? A. He was. yes. Q. Did you see Krlbs there on any other occasion? A. I have Keen Mr. Kribs a great many times in Mitchell & Tanaer's office, yes, Mr. Q. After October. l0i. did you come to Portland at any ether time other than when Senator Mitchell came? A. Welt I did not always oeme with him. but I came out each Summer during the vacation. Q. Did he come each Summer, also? A. Yes. sir. Q. Did you see Senator Mitchell here in the Summer of 1932? A. Yes. sir. Q. Or that occasion did you see the books of the firm, and I refer particularly to the day book which Is here In evi dence? A. Yes. sir; I have seen the books of the firm every year we have been out here. , Q. Do you know whether or not that day book was at any time in the year 1KC or in the Summer of IKK when you wre here in the hands of the defendant John H. Mitchell? A. I do. I know bat I have brought the books to the Seaator for his Inspec tion. Q. State what he raid In reference to the bok and what you saw him do. A. Well, he made various- remark at the time he was looking them over to the effect that he wanted to look over and see bow much business the firm was do ing and whether he was getting his proper share, etc. And eometlme he would, in looking over the month, ask me how they arrived at certain figures as to bis share, nd I have taken my pencil and figured It out for him and snowed him. Q. I band you Government's exhibit 44. Who signed the name John H. Mitch ell there. If you know? A. I did. Signed at Mitchell's Order. Q. State under whet circumstances- you signed that At whose request If any body's? A. That letter was dictated by the Senator to Miss Le Baum. who was then my assistant and affer dictating It he made some remark about being bus and going uptown, and he said when It was written off to sign his name with mv initials, which I did. Q. Was that an exceptional thing for you to do? A. I have done that under some cir cumstances under his direction, but it was net the usual way of signing. He usually signed his own name. Q. The Initials on hear are whose? A. Mine. H. C. R. Q. This is the letter of June 9. ac knowledging the receipt of a copy of the books? A. I remember 1L Q. 1 hand you Government exhibit W. Did you ever see the original of that paper before? A. I have, yes Ir. I saw that In June. 1P02. In Washington. D. C; that tsv the original. I did not see this copy. Q. Under what circumstances. A. I remember at the time of the Sen ator writing to Judgo Tanner, shortly be fore that, for a copy of the entries In the book, and I remember that coming on. and I remember the Senator dictating the acknowledgment which you have Just shown me. and 1 remember seeing It lying on his desk, and remember looking ovr . V. iia you ever see it tnere at any other time? A. I remember jeelng it when he re ceived it. and dictated the answer and throwing It over on the desk, and 1 might have seen it other times. Q. Were you In Portland in the Sum mer of 1S03? A. I wa;: yes. sir. Q. Waa Senator Mitchell here? He way. A. Tells of the Day Book. Q. Did you see the day book whleh Is before you there, tbe exhibit whleh is la evidence here, during that time? A. 1 did. yes. Q. Did you see It during that time In the hands of Senator Mitchell? A. Yes. sir. Q. Under what circumstancest State what he said and what yod paw. A. He Just called for the book and wanted to look over the business, as usual, and I got It for him; and .that la the time I made that copy of the agree ment for him. I remember after looking over it he asked me about the agreement, and I went and borrowed Judge Tan ner's copy and made It for him from lu Q. Were you subpenacd to appear be fore the Grand Jury In Portland, about the month of February. IMG? A. I was In Washington. D. C. Q. Did you have any comersatlon with the defendant John H. Mitchell after re ceiving that subpena? A. 1 did; yes. sir. I went and saw him the same evening and bad a conversation with him. Q. State what wan said? A. I went up and told the Senator I had been subpenaed and showed him the subpena. Q. Where was this?. A. It was at his residence where he was living. No. 1433 Rhode Island avenu. N. W. Q. Any one else present? A. No. sir; not at that time. Q. State what was said? Showed Hint Suhpena. A. I showed him the subpena and asked him what he supposed they wanted me for? He told me he presumed they would want to question me In regard to tfte firm's business. And I was somewhat surprised at the lime. He then stated to me that Judge Tanner had been before the grand Jury, that he had been there with a copy of their agreement of 1S01. and told me that the agreement that Judge Tanner had sworn to showed that all fees earned In the departments at Washington belonged to Tanner. I knew there was something wrong when he told me that, and I was perfectly shocked Mr. Bennett: That Is objected to. Let him state what he said and not what he thought. And we ask that that be strlck. en out? ' A. Well, when he told me that The Court: Did you have any conver sation with him after that? Was that the last thing that occurred? - A. No. sir. The Court: Well, go on and tell Just what took place, but not what you thought or anything about that Tell what- he said and what you said. Mr. Bennett: The other matter will be stricken out will It, your honor? The Court: Let It go out. If you think It Is material. Q. Confine your statement to what was said by him and by yoa. Talk With Mitchell. A. Well, after he told me that Tanner who that Tanner was to receive all fees earned In the departments. I looked at him. 1 Dresume for a minute, with otit speaking. He then said to me that i-a i. t - u7 fcl was out here In December, and that they had come to - the conclusion that any means were justifiable to defeat the as saults that tfcse s of b s were making upon them. I asked him If "there was anywav In "which I could avoid com ing here. "He- told me no; that I was compelled to answer the subpena. I said to him. or asked him. what In the world I could do. He said I must see Tanner Immediately on my arrival here, and told me that Tanner would show me a copy of the agreement that he had sworn to. He told rs- that that was their agree ment He told me that after Tanner had shown me the agreement he would tell me what be had sworn to. and would tell me what I wa.t to swer to. There w conversation about other matters. I don't know whether I could state those or not? , Q. Unless they were connected with this case A. They were not connected with this case. Q. Did h say anything to you' about thit contract on any other occasion there rr!"r to tha oqe you have just been tes tifying afeottt? A. He did. He asked me If I knew where his copy of the firm agreement was 7 Q. When was that? A. That was en the 31at of January of this year. Q. Of 1501? A. No. of this year, the 31st of January. IMS. That waa at his house, one morn ing. I told him I supposed he had It J himself. He sold he was unable to find , it and wanted to know If I did not have ! . I told him if I had It It was down j at the committee-room in th tin box In which he kept the Price estate papers, and I would take a look for It when I went down. I went down la a little while, but was busy and did not look for It at the time. A little later the Senator came down and asked me If I had found It. I told him I would take a look right then, which I did. and I was unable to find It. Mitchell's Anxious Query Q. Did he say anything further at that time In regard to It? A. He asked me If I remembered It par ticularly? I said. No; not particularly, why? He sald "Well, that Is all right: you don't need to remember It" Q Was anything said In this conver sation after you were subpenaed In re lation to a letter? A. The Senator told me he had a tele gram from Tanner. I believe, or a com munication, to the effect that some ner. inr cay l left Washington, which was Sunday the 5th of February, the Senator or some one telephoned to the hotel for me to come to the Raleigh Hotel ami get a letter from a Mr. Miller. I did so t n iitorn f tt.. TToi.ik a Mr II. P. Miller, brother-in-law of Judge Tanner s. Mr. Miller gave me a. letter In an envelope addressed to Senator Mitchell In Judge Tanner's handwriting: 1 took it up to the Senator's house and delivered it to him. He took the letter and went Into another room and stayed a little ATi- ' ' :T' 'V tt' "i."? krihrn rVt h. ,rr -.c " uc nii umc i cipriru id leave, ana l told him I thought I would leave either me. I believe. If I would come back: 1 told him I did not know whthet- I trnntii have time that I had to pack up and get away. I did not go back, but shortly be fore I got ready to take the train a letter was brought to me by Max Prncht. Q. During that conversation, or either of those conversations with the Senator after you were subpenaed. do you recall as to whether he read to you any tele gram or stated to you the contents of any telegram from Judge Tanner, and If so. state It? Telegram From Tanner. A. On the next day after I was sub penaed he read me a telegram from Tan ner, to the effect as I remember it. that Tanner and his son were threatened with Indictment by the grand Jury In reference-Objected to as Incompetent. Overruled, defendant except. A. In reference to the firm business, and asking what Harry says. And he turned to me and says, "what do you say?" or words, to that effect. 1 replied that I thought Tanner was a blamed fool sendln- anv ?uch mesans "SSt thi and fhat I wSuld nrtwfwer He , iS'inWiJS? ?.r Jh- H,C tor i wire. then sold he would have to answer It. jnd he dictated an answer to me to the effect that Harry had been subpenaed Mr. Bennett: We make the same objec tion to this. Objection overruled, defendant excepts. A. and would leave the next day. and for him to see me Immediately on my arrival. That Is as near as I can re member the wording of it Q. Wb.it did you do with that telegram after it wa dictated? A. I wrote It out and sent It On the uav I left when I saw him at his house. and he spoke of sending the letter, he read me another telegram; said he be- l,. . T.1 " JIITJ h,? 1 SJTl , from Tanner, and read something like this: "Does Horry remember the arree meat of 1MI or remember writing It?" r did not see the telegam; he simply read It t me. Mr. Bennett: The same objection to all tbW. Objection overruled, defendant excepts. A. He asked me then tf I did remem brr it: I said I dkL That was about all the conversation I remember In reference tu the telegram. Identifies Envelope. Q. I hand yru paper marked for identi fication. June 193S. bearing tbe printed letterhead -United SUtes Senate." When did you first see that paper? .V That Is the envelope that was de livered te me bv Max Pracht shortly be- ! fort 1 took the train to come out here in February to appear before the grand jry- Q. Was anythinz inside of it to your knowledge, at the time It was delivered? A. I aid not ktuw what was In It: It Has sealed. Q. Dli yet? subsequently see It opened? A. I did sir. in tne grand jury room. Q. I call your attention to a letter marked "Personal and Confidential In itnari r envelope. A. ' I san that taken from, this envelope when It was opened la the graiid. Jury room. Q. I call your attention to Govern ment's Exhibit 50. When did you first see that? A. I suw that after the envelopes were opened In tbe grand Jury room to Febru ary. 1301. I Q. Taken from those envelopes? A. Yes. sir. ! Q. By whom? A. By yourself fMr. Heneyt. Mr. Heney: We wlH otter the two ea- velopes ia evidence. Tne same were received as Govern ment's Exhibits KS and 10T. (2. 1 ou came to Portland- std you. m- mediately after having these eon versa.- ! tions with Senator Mitchell? Before the Grand Jury. A. I left Washington on the night of the 5th of February and arrived here on the morning of the Mtfe. Q. And while here, you appeared, be fore the grand Jury. A. Yes. sir. Q. Did you talk with any Govern ment officer before going before -the grand Jury on your arrival here? A. On my arrival here. I west Jf rectly to tne Portland Hotel a'nd get my breakfast. I then reported to the District Attorney's offlee. I went lu. there were several people there ad I met Mr. Banks. I had a Mule talk with him. Just about my trip out here, told him 1 was there to report, that t had beca subpoenaed, and toW ahn that I was tired from my trip and If I was to be examined that day I would Itke to be oxamloetl at once: If not I wenU like to be excused so I eouW go bac and take a little rest Mr. Thurston: I have not obJeled to this so far. but to nay further con versation I s.lall object Q. No; I only want to know what you did. A. Mr. Bank3 went out of (he room and in a little bit he eame back aaJ said they wanted me to appear before the grand Jury at once Objected to. Q. What did you do? A. He told me tney wanted me la there. Q. Never mind what he told you. He came back and what did y-tm ? A. I went Into the grand 3ry room. Q. When did you return te Wash ington. If at all? A. I v'ut back to Waahfcx&tett. I think, the night of the ISta of Febru ary. Q. Did you have any conversation, wltn Senator Mitchell with reference to this eitse. r tnese matters, after your return to Washington? i Says Mitchell Cried. A. Yes. sir; I had a conversation with him the same evening. Q. Who was present? A. No one present but he and I. at that time. Q. Where was It A. In his room. 1433 Rhode fatead avenue. N. W Washington. Q. What was said? A. When I went Ir he asked roe If I was back, and I said ye. Asttl I said -there' Is more trouble. Seaafeoc " Mx. Thurston: You said what? A. i suid "there seems to be more trouble. Senator." He flew into a rae and began swearing' at me; called me some names and "said I was helping the prosecution all In my power. He a Ho accused Tanner and I of entering; Into a conspiracy to ruin- him; and he also said that our testimony, as he sad read it In the oaDers. was a mass of .lies from beginning? to end. I teM the Senator at taat time If he felt that way about It I would tender my resig nation and asked him to accept it He said he would see about that in a few days, and told me to think ever It. He alio at tne ame time said he wanted to get a little statement from me as to what hud occurred. During' the prog ress of the conversation, he turned to me and asked me had 1 seen the gen uine agreement when I was out here oefore tae grand Jury. I told htm I bad. He asked me if It really did contain a clause to the effect that he was to r-celve alt fees earned eefor. the. Departments at Washington, etc I said to him: "Why. Senator, you know it does." He flew Into a rage and shook his fist at me. said It was a lie. that he did not know aaytalR? of the kind. That he had never seen It I replied that I couhI net under stand, if that wss the case, why he had been making up a false one ealy about a month before. After a ht je quieted down and sat there, the tears running down his face and he said: H&rry. you know they hadn't ought to prosecute me for that AH I ever got was seme little checks. I felt aw fully tsorry for him. Relative to Interview. Did you have any conversation with Q. the Senator In regard to an interview "r Lv ,r , KSt-v" 1 ! P0? .V- Sr ' 1 ."i1":, , ?- jS1 Jl.Vi alla,,tr T .wv r t- .p"' SAr m tV" ,hi the Zo. of February. It was the morn- ntt f 1 tLKwhto ' ?naa PuWtenJ in tfee Washington papers. Q. You mean the Indictment against Senator Mitchell In this ease? A. la this case. yes. sir. It eame about In this way. I had gone direct to the ' omce that morning and la a short time Mrs. Beerbower came down, una. of i .. iuV . w. r- v... . !,M that the Senator hatl ctat Objected to as hearsay. Q. Don't state anything that was said by her or you net In the absence of Senator MltchelL A. All right Well, she tad some dic tations which she wrote out After writing- tt out It was a statement to the press ghe naased It over te me for In spection. We looked over It and I said. "This cannot go out." Mr. Thurston: Was Mitchell there then? A. Mitchell wasn't there at that time. Q. Don't state anything when Mitchell was not there- A. I placed the statement on my desk. I think both Mr. Brown and "Mr. Breek ens'came In and asked If there was a statement and X told them there might be a little later. Objected to as hearsay. Objection sus tained. Gives Statement to Mitchell. Q. Don't state aaythinz whMe Sena tor Mitchell was not present. A. After a bis the Senator came down, and he asked for the statement and I ! fve it to him. I told him at that tit: lhit 1 thought there ought to be sor i corrections, or changes In It; I want t time some wanted to talk to him before he sent it out. He asked me what was the matter with it and 1 started In to ten" htm. He then stopped me Q. What bad you said up to that point? A. I started in to tell him that I would not make It so strong. He stopped me In the middle of a sentence and he teM Mrs. Beerbower. who was there, and his grandson. Jeha MiteheH Handy, to go out of th room, that he wanted to talk to me akw a little bit He 'told them to go up to the gallery or some where for a few minutes. WheH they bad left the room he turned to ate and wanted to know what was the matter with tbat statement I explained te him that I thought it was too strong. In fact. I said. "Senttor. if I was you, I wouldn t maice any statement at veil know and I Know tnat been p. client tf Zhe effisrtft there for several years, and hasten piyta? money In." He flew intp-a very violent rage and shook his fin st m aad said It wa a lie: tbatire didn t know anything of the kind and that he would swear to K on a stack of a thouind Bieiest Tbat Is almost his exiut words, aa near as I can remember. I sa!d. "Very welt Sea ator. vuu are liable to make yourself out a liar if you do so. because I know tet ter: Tanner "knaa better: Krifex knows better, aad Tanaer's st?-aogj.pher and perhaps others." He studied a Ml tie hit and anally he raid he believed he did remember seeing Kribs last fall. Jest before a Wt a little while and saya "I will fix It" He took hfctOpenHL struck out part of it aad wrote la othvrs. and then he handed it to m to copy It over, and as near a I n rememcer tt read' HUe this in 8ubstaa'.e. Mr. Tburstoo: VV objc.t to the cm tents of that papr as not the best evi dence and no proper foundation lakl for i ssttarfruy vtdvace of Us mates. Mr. lime: I tsittk that r mc . stav what it was that he u jld to lute. 11 aa., - thtnR- la re&ttea to what ins wrotyr lit the Slrst paper. Objections, and Ruilnss. Ms. Thurston: I azr not ehjectisf to what was said there. Q. Was anything; sakt as to what it was la the first paper that was wross? A. Why. t&e statement ?ras nad; it the first paper Mr. Thurston: No. not what state ment was made: what was said there. Q. What became of the first paper? A. I presume It waa thrown, kx the waste-basket, after I had made a new copy making: the changes. Cj. WeH. now. what was said te the first 9per about this matter that you. were talking of? Mr. Thurston. We renew the same ob jection. t The objection, k overruled. Defendant excepts. A. The first paser was to the effeet tthat he did not know Kribs: that he had sever seea him and has never had any conversa tion with him. and also denyla; speirift eaHy having received the sum. of mney as published in the morning's paper. The second one that 1 wrote was te the effeet that he had never had any eoavecsatlen with Mr. Kr& to regard to any land or business matters, and loavteg- In th same duBse denying' the receipt of the moaey- ro-s-Examination of Robertson. Questions by Mr. Thurston.: Q. When, aid you nest Beet Senator MKeheH? A. I think I met him first nt the Sptdex Of 1S32. Q. Where. A. In his office here In Portland. Q. Was he a Senator of the United Slates at that time? A. Yes. sir. Q. Ana eoattawed to be so w? to Mown 4. isorr A. Ktgh'een ninety-seven. Q. Wat a were yott emofnyed In. ike; of flee? A. I was first employed In. the oAos of Mttchelt & Tanner en the )tb of, Au gust. M9t. Q. That was before you had seen Sea ator Mitchell? A- Yes. sir. Q. And In what capacity? A. Stenographer. Q. How long did yo remain as aa em ploye to the omce? A. I was with them continuously op until some tfcne to November. toSS. Thea I went to WaahingtOR. Q. How dd were- yeu at the tnae of your first emoteymen. In the office in 3l? A I was b years w. Q. What chance wts nude to your- re lation to the otfiee. if any. at tbe Ifcae you first went to WaehiwttaHi with Sena tor MMcboll. DM you hMt th wffice A. Xfs. sir. Q. And ceaeed to be an employe eC tho office? A. Ye sir. Q. And of the law firm? A. Yes, sir. Q. And accepted what position? A Hermann's Secretary. A. I accepted a positiea as cierk to the committee on Irrigation of arki huM&t of the House. In other wwrdo. the ydm secretary of Binger Hermann. Q. You went there wit Binger Knr mum as. his secretary? A. Yes. sir ? Q. How leng iUl you continue to that enf!oyi&ent? A. Up until the h of Marcs. 1BR. when Ms term expired. Q. Then waat wan your nxt etnolay ment? A. My next employment was aeaistin-s Senator Mc Bride tar a whole, and nfcen for a whHe 1 was one of the decks fc Senator Fairbanks. Q. When did ye resume your relation with. Senator MHehelt? A. I returned, to .fwrtiand ht the ntter part of September. 1S87. and about Shres weeics later i u a gam erapteyea oy tne firm. Q. And contieued In that employ down to what time? A. Continued to that employ dews to the tfene I was appointed his private sec retary." Q. When was that? A. I believe that was the 3th. of March. KM. Q. Did Senator MitcheK tender yoa that posMien? A. He did. yes. sir. Q. What was the eompeasatioa? A. The compensatieR at first, until ha get a chairmanship, was SIS a mentis. Q. And after he secured a enairmaa ship, what was it? A. It was HS& each month, and we always got an extra month of tho same amount. Q. Then you went to Washington with, him? A. Yes sir. Q. And assumed the confidential rela tions existing betweea the Senator and hie private secretary? A. Yes. Q. And conUneed to that relation down to about March of this year? A. Yes. sir. ' Had Charge of Correspondence. Q. During- all that time you had, charge In a general way of the Sesa tor's corre spondence, did you net? A. I did. Q. Public and private? A. Not of his privar correspondence. bo sir. Q. Net of his private correspondence? A. No. slr Q. Who attended to that? A. I never Interfered with his private i correspondence, and he always attended to tnat mmseir. l nave written teiters frem dictation to members of hfc family, but letters received from members of his family, that were private, or anything: of that kind, they were never opened by me. y. I am. set referring to family letters. I am referring- to letters generally, busi ness letters. A. Oh. business letters? Yes. certainly. Q. And general letters on ether sub jects than pubHc -business? A. Yes. sir. - Q. Ail that class of matter, except hi familv correspondence, you had eharge of? A. WelL. 1 handled It as stenographer iand bis secretary, yes. sir. I didn't have absolute charge of It Q. Did yeu have authority to open this cerrespondence coming to hlxn without I first submitting- it to him? . A. I did not. except in a few cases, j The Senator opened his own malt and. I generally dictated an answer to every i letter received, himself personally. j Heaty Correspondence. Q. About what was tbe extent of bis j correspondence- after he returned to tho Senate la 1531? A. Well, hit eorrespoKdeace would run j Quke heavy; some days we would hare 1 1C0 letters: aome days we would have 30. I I suppose It would average, perfaapsv 30 I letters a day. Q. Did the Senator answer all his let ters? A. He alwavs endeavored to answer Levery letter received; yest sir. V. And promptly as receives : A. As promptly as received;. yes, sir. Q. Now how much time did It reuuiro from him every day to handle his mail and dictate and make answers? A. Well. I should say about three hours a day would be sufficient to .die tat a the answer? and sign, the malL I don't, think It wouhl average that. It Is a very heavy mall that takes that long. Q. Did Senator MiteheH receive many requests for the nee of his services as Senator la matters pending before tho different departments? - A. Why. of course; every Senator re ceives lets of reaves tc. Q. Every Senator receives such rs guestj? A. Yes. sir. Q. And to It net a fact owing- te the location, and iaterescs of the State of Oregon that Senator Mitchell's mall in that matter was very heavy from time to time? A. At times- hi mall was very heavy, yes. sir. Q. Do you know whether he attended to aH tho request made of him? A. He endeavored to. yes. tr. Work of the Seaator. Q. By wrRiag to the different depart ments' and by waHlntr noon the officers of the departisfrat attemptktxr to secure faverahlo actK-a to each- case for his cuBf:Mutents ? A I don't kaow exactly who he may have endeavored te secure to each. ene. but J know that he atterderl to them In tb ordinary course of buHne?s. f. And he answered alt those reqeencs wUn a statenteat wf what he had dis covered ir bad dene to the department did he not? X. I couM not say that he did that In tViTY nttactc en. h A Oei-t. a ly i-wo.