Oct. 16-Continued. Register and Friend, No. 34293. Sun Republic, No. 34298. A. Hudson, No. 34300_ M. Northup, No. 34301 Tate Printing Co., No. 34382. F. R. Huth, No. 34303_ G. Arnett, No. 34304_. Kewaunee Printing Co., No. 34305– Wisconsin Agriculturist, No. 34306. Nee Ska Ra, No. 34307- Anderson Publishing Co., No. 34309. F. Parsons, No. 34359_ L. Barney, No. 34360_ O. L. Gust, No. 34373_. Catholic Sentinel, No. 34374. L. Barney, No. 34422_. Western Union, No. 34428. L. H. Stevens, No. 34591. Total $2.80 65.00 25.00 2.38 48.34 20.00 112.50 6.50 20.00 6.50 60.00 30.00 76.20 420. 21 6. 00 17.05 266. 20 75.00 6.00 2.00 112.00 1.50 60.00 5.00 5.00 286.61 57,39 25.00 10.00 3.00 10.57 42.00 200.00 203.27 3, 188. 65 The CHAIRMAN. Has counsel before him the report that was used by Senator Sutherland in his examination of the witness? Mr. LITTLEFIELD. No. I do not think that I care to spend any time on that. Mr. Black tells me that he has in his office a copy of this particular pamphlet, to which the chairman referred. The CHAIRMAN. I think the record had better show that the report submitted to the Wisconsin Legislature on March 18, from which Senator Sutherland has read, came with the papers from the governor of the State of Wisconsin to the United States Senate, and passed into my hands as chairman of the subcommittee in the ordinary course of reference. That will give it a status in the record. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. That identifies it. Senator POMERENE. I think, also, that the following memorandum should be furnished as a part of the examination, the memorandum being furnished by Mr. Edmonds, showing the names of the local managers with whom he had arrangements for special compensation, together with the amount of that compensation, according to his best recollection. (The paper referred to was marked “Exhibit Edmonds B," and is as follows:) Others may have asked for and received compensation, but these are all I have any recollection of. E. A. EDMONDS. The CHAIRMAN. The record will also contain the statement of election expenses filed under the lay on behalf of Isaac Stephenson. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I think that is already in. The CHAIRMAN. Then the record will contain it. It will not be necessary, of course, to put it in twice. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Mr. Edmonds, your attention has just been called to the fact that at one time shortly prior to the payment of the $30,000 by Senator Stephenson there were more or less conferences between yourself and the other managers with the Senator with reference to the contribution of additional funds for carrying on the campaign. Be kind enough to state to the committee whether or not at that time there was not a period of something like 10 days when the Senator's campaign was practically at a standstill, awaiting his determination whether he would go on and furnish additional funds to enable you to further prosecute it. Mr. EDMONDS. Yes, sir. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. And during this period of 10 days had you then, or at the beginning of this period of 10 days, substantially exhausted the funds at the disposal of Mr. Puelicher and Mr. Van Cleve? I do not say exhausted, but substantially exhausted. Mr. EDMONDS. Át the earliest date of those 10 days; yes, sir. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Was the Senator informed that unless additional funds were furnished by him the campaign would come practically to a standstill? Mr. EDMONDS. Yes. He was informed that the campaign would come to a standstill so far as the expenditure of money was concerned, and these men with whom I had contracted and agreed with for work would be called in. As the matter was stated, the campaign would end. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. The Senator, as I understand it, did very vigorously object to the amount of money that the campaign was costing him? Mr. EDMONDS. Yes, sir. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. You are able to state that the Senator felt, as the result of your conference during this period of 10 days, that too much money was being expended? Mr. EDMONDS. I believed he did. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Do I understand that the Senator made any specific criticism as to the manner in which the money was being expended? Mr. EDMONDS. He did not to me. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. The Senator's position was, without going into details, that the whole campaign up to date had cost him more than he expected? Mr. EDMONDS. It was. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Do you know that the Senator's original contemplation was that the campaign would not cost him more than probably $30,000 or thereabouts? Mr. EDMONDS. I have not any idea. Senator SUTHERLAND. Mr. Littlefield, I would suggest to you that the testimony would be perhaps more valuable if you did not lead the witness quite so much. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I am cross-examining him. Senator SUTHERLAND. I understand that. However, you may take your own course about it. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I appreciate the suggestion made by the Sen ator. Senator SUTHERLAND. I think you realize that the testimony might be more valuable if the witness were not led quite so much. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I was proceeding upon the hypothesis that I was conducting the ordinary cross-examination. Of course, I appreciate that the witness was our manager, and also appreciate the suggestion of the Senator. Mr. Edmonds, state whether or not in any of your conferences with Senator Stephenson, from the time when he first made the arrangement with you in the latter part of June or during this period of the 10 days' practical suspension of work, he said anything to you with reference to his original expectation as to the cost of the campaign. Mr. EDMONDS. No, sir; I think he at no time ever told me what he expected to spend in the campaign. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. What was the fact during these 10 days when you were awaiting his decision? During that period did you, or did you not, make any new contracts with new managers? Mr. EDMONDS. My judgment is that during the earlier days I did, or attempted to do so, but possibly not during the whole period of 10 days; but the campaign was at a standstill. I was unable to determine whether we could go on with the campaign. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. What was the fact about men being in the field, to whom the sums to be paid for compensation and expenses had not been advanced? Were there men of that character at work in the field? Mr. EDMONDS. I think so. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Had you any way of making good your engagements with them, unless Senator Stephenson advanced additional money? Mr. EDMONDS. None; unless I paid it myself. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Of course, I mean outside of your own personal money. Mr. EDMONDS. No, sir. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. How frequently was the question as to whether or not additional money should be advanced by the Senator discussed between you and the Senator in this period of 10 days? Mr. EDMONDS. During this period of 10 days I do not think at all, until I wrote him a letter. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Explaining the situation? Mr. EDMONDS. Yes. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Did you hear from the Senator in relation to the letter, by phone or otherwise? Mr. EDMONDS. By phone, and confirmed by letter, to my best recollection. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Was that at the expiration of the period of 10 days? Mr. EDMONDS. To which I referred, yes. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. State whether or not it was at that time that the Senator finally determined to go on with the campaign and furnish the additional funds. Mr. EDMONDS. I do not know as to that. I know that he sent the $30,000. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Was that the time when his determination was indicated to you? Mr. EDMONDS. Yes. Senator POMERENE. Mr. Edmonds, you were about to or did state a particular sum? Mr. EDMONDS. I referred to the $30,000. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. This period of 10 days ended substantially with the receipt of the $30,000 check? Mr. EDMONDS. Yes. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Did this check go to Mr. Puelicher, or did direct to you? it come Mr. EDMONDS. It did not come to me. Senator SUTHERLAND. There was a payment on July 30 of $10,000, and then on August 7 of $30,000, and on the 20th of $15,000. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. There was a period of practically 10 days. I do not know the exact amounts. When I say " 10 days," I do not mean that you are confined to just 10 days, but a period of approximately that amount of time. As I understand it, the $30,000 check came to you after a period of something like 10 days, more or less, during which you were awaiting the receipt of funds from the Senator? Mr. EDMONDS. That statement is correct, with the exception of the fact that it came to the bank, and not to me. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. That is what I mean. Is it a fact that during that period the Senator was considering this question as to whether he would have the campaign continued? Mr. EDMONDS. I do not know. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. The matter had been put up to him, had it not? Mr. EDMONDS. Not by me. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Do you not know that it had been put up to him by somebody? Mr. EDMONDS. I believe it to have been; yes, sir. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. By Mr. Puelicher, I suppose? Mr. LITTLEFIELD. And your understanding of the situation is that he took about that period of time to consider it? Mr. EDMONDS. As to that I do not know. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Your knowledge is that something like 10 days elapsed before he finally decided to go on? Mr. EDMONDS. My knowledge is that during a period of about 10 days we were short of funds, and the campaign lapsed. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Is it not also your knowledge that the Senator's attention was called to the fact about 10 days before he paid in the $30,000? Mr. EDMONDS. My belief is so, but not my knowledge. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I would like to ascertain, if I can, a little more in detail about this matter of organizing. You have frequently stated, in answer to inquiries, that money was placed in the hands of various people by you for organization? Mr. EDMONDS. Yes. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I will ask you whether or not that term " organization," as you call it, has a reasonably well-defined and wellunderstood meaning among the men with whom you were dealing, from a political point of view? Mr. EDMONDS. I believe it has. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I will ask you whether or not the compensation and expenses of managers who were to take charge of the campaign in particular localities were, or were not, part of an organizing expense, according to your understanding? Mr. EDMONDS. They were. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I will ask you whether or not the securing of signatures to petitions, which petitions were to be the basis of the right of Senator Stephenson to enter the primary as a candidate, prior to the 30 days preceding the date of the election, was, or was not, an organizing expense, according to your understanding of the term "organizing"? Mr. EDMONDS. I should say it was: yes, sir. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. And when I say," according to your understanding of the term," I would be glad to have you to keep in mind that it applies to all the questions that I am about to put along that line, and to the sense in which you have used the term as a witness. Do I make myself clear? Mr. EDMONDS. I think so. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Be kind enough to state whether or not the expense of circulating, distributing, and posting advertising matter, lithographs, and posters in the various localities was or not, in your understanding, a proper organizing expense. Mr. EDMONDS. That was a proper organizing expense. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Do you include that when you say that you authorized men to do organizing? Mr. EDMONDS. I do. Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Do you include that as an item? |