OCR Text |
Show HEM? RESUMES PD6 HOUSE INVESTIGATION Attorney for Morris and Wilson Companies Claims Immunity Before Answering An-swering Questions. SWIFT FILES USED IN. EXAMINATION Letters Read Refer to Trouble Trou-ble With Interstate Commerce Com-merce Commission Over Disposal of Bad Eggs. CHICAGO, March 15. Alleged efforts ef-forts of Morris & Co. to evade certain tax assessments in Oklahoma; alleged efforts to defeat the Borland resolution which provided for investigation of the packing house industry; the retaining of former Senator Bailey to oppose the suit of the state of Texas to oust the packers, and some of the troubles of Swift & Co. with the sale of bad eggs, were among the features of the meat inquiry today. Basil Manley, an examiner for the federal trade commission, presided, while Francis J. Heney attorney for the commission, questioned witnesses and read many letters and telegrams. The principal witness was M. W. Borders, Bor-ders, who for fifteen years was counsel for Morris & Co., and for the last eighteen months counsel for Wilson & Co. During four hours, in the course of which some personal feeling developed between witnesses and inquisitor, Mr. Borders added no material information to the records. He identified a few of the persons referred to in the letters, but his memory failed him, he said, on many points. Showed No Embarrassment. At best, when his previous knowledge of transactions was shown in the correspondence, cor-respondence, Mr. Borders, unembarrassed, unembar-rassed, said that the letters spoke for themselves. According to the letters, Morris & Co. were anxious to be on friendly terms with whomsoever was elected assessor at Oklahoma City, where they had erected erect-ed a plant in competition, Mr. Borders said, with the Armour and Swift plants at Fort Worth, Texas. They were threatened with an assessment assess-ment of $1,000,000, or $500,000 more than the year before, and gave much consideration to the forming of a village vil-lage with their own village government on the outskirts of Oklahoma City. Interest in Elections. A letter of November 4, 1916, from Mr. Borders to II. H. Hutchings of Oklahoma Okla-homa National Stockyards company, remarked re-marked of the two candidates for assessor: asses-sor: "I do not believe that Carrico will went anything but support, but Offutt will need all that he can get. In any event, I want the friendship of both of these men, so that we will be with the winner, and I want you men on the ground to be sure that, this is brought about." It appeared that $90 was expended in the assessor's campaign, and that after some discussion as to prorating it, the sum was deemed so small that it was charged against Oklahoma City Stockyards Stock-yards company. Mr. Heney tried to gain from Bordors admission that this was only part of the expense, but the witness, disclaiming disclaim-ing specific knowledge, said that large suras never were spent, and that Mr. Heney in the end would find that the $90 represented the entire expenditure. Memory Hazy. Mr. Borders 's memory was hazy as to the alleged connection with the Texas litigation of former Senator Joseph Bailey of Texas. Mr. Heney sought to show that Mr. Bailey was retained, for a fee of $5000, prorated among the packers pack-ers on a hasis of their business in Texas, because of his influence with the attorney attor-ney general of Texas. Mr. Borders did not recollect that Mr. Bailey had been retained at all. When Mr. Heney read a letter by Henry Veeder, counsel for Swift & Co., discussing discuss-ing the share each packer should pay of the Bailey fee, and remarked that "Mr. Borders has already paid on this basis." Mr. Borders said be could check tip on it. Mr. Heney repeatedly tried to get the witness to admit knowledge of efforts to defeat the Boriand resolution. ''Do you jemerni'Cr of Morris & Co. (Continued oa Page Eight). IE1EY RESUMES HIS PROBE OF PACKERS (Continued from Page OneJ) naying out $000 in an-attempt to got ,'ongressman Tag,'art of Kansas to vote mainst the resolution?" asked Mr. Henev. r Witness ilirl not, nor did lie know ot my other efforts along that line. Letter From Veeder. A letter from Henry Veeder to i A. .lunter, manager of Swift & Co., East St. Louis, 111., on October 10, 1914, referred re-ferred to the senatorial aspirations of Lawrence Stringer. The letter read: "Mr. Scott Matthews of the dairy and food commission, called upon me :liis morning and asked that Switt & Co. at East St. Louis give their moral support sup-port to the candidacy of Mr. Stringer for United States senator, and I assured as-sured him that Swift & Co. would be glad to give their moral support as he requested. The attorneys for Morris & Co. and Armour & Co. have also, as J understand, agreed to give moral support sup-port of their companies to Mr. Stringer." On the same day Mr. Veeder reported the Matthews interview to Mr. Edward F. Swift, and said that evidently the commission did not intend to administer the food and dairy laws oppressively, but fairly. Sale of Bad Eggs. , "He (Matthews) then added,' how-ever, how-ever, that the departments intends to enforce the law, ami that t'hey now have a case against one of the puckers, he thought Swift & Co.. for the sale of bad eggs," read the letter. "He intended to prosecute to the end. I think this egg case can be settled up in view of our present relations with Mr. Matthews, Mat-thews, and I thin it lr important to do so while it can be done.'' f'J in the same letter Mr. Vtdcr ex-l pressed the opinion that if Swift & Co. were to be in constant trouble with the food commissioners of various states over eggs, it would be wise to form a separate corporation to handle them. In the course of one of many tilts between be-tween Mr. Heney and Mr. Borders, the former remarked: "No doubt the packers would he glad to have you conduct this hearing." "The government would have no cause to regret it," replied the witness. "No doubt you would handle it differently.'1 dif-ferently.'1 ' "I certainly would," said Mr. Bw1 ders with measured emphasis. , When adjournment was taken, Mr. Henev did not set a date for resumption, saying he had some matters that would j engage his attention outside the courtroom. court-room. ' ' |