Mr. INSULL. Well, no; it affected Colonel Smith's campaign. I spent some money directly which, while I think he knows I was doing something in that direction, and I think Mr. Moore knew I was doing something, I do not think they either of them have any idea what my expenditures were in connection with it. It was in connection with the World Court agitation.

The CHAIRMAN. Since they do not know about it, will you tell us?

Mr. INSULL. I spent $26,904.34 on a campaign against the World Court amongst the foreign-language groups, and in addition to that I spent $2,330.85 in connection with newspaper advertising in the foreign-language newspapers. The CHAIRMAN. For Colonel Smith?

Mr. INSULL. No. Those expenses were incurred by me in carrying on propaganda against the World Court.

The CHAIRMAN. That being an issue in the campaign, you figure that it was beneficial to Colonel Smith?

Mr. INSULL. There is no question but that it was beneficial to Colonel Smith, but I would have spent it just the same, whoever was the candidate, because I am very much concerned on that subject-on the subject of general European relations of the United States.

Then, in addition to that, I spent $4,500 on similar propaganda, especially among the colored people. I can not give you the details of that, but in the case of all three of those items the expenditures were made at my request by Mr. Daniel J. Schuyler. I do not think you have subpoenaed him, but he will be very glad to give you the details.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Were those moneys spent among colored people against the World Court?

Mr. INSULL. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Can you tell us approximately when this money-this $26,904.34-was spent?

Mr. INSULL. Those three items were spent-more of it was spent 60 to 90 days before the primary, but the expenditures spread to a limited extent for a period a little prior to that. I would say that a small amount may have been spent in 1925, but the greater portion was spent in 1926.

The CHAIRMAN. Were there some other moneys that you spent that were of benefit, naturally, to the campaign of Mr. Smith?

Mr. INSULL. None that I am aware of, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you give contributions to what is termed the organization here, the Crowe-Barrett organization, that was supporting or supposed to be mostly supporting Smith?

Mr. INSULL. I want to give you all the information I possibly can as to my operations, but there is a certain point that one gets to where one would feel he has to consult counsel as to the powers of this committee to ask for information. Now, I want to give you all the information that it is possible for me to give. I looked upon the Crowe-Barrett organization as opposed to Colonel Smith. In fact, I was in London before I knew that the Crowe-Barrett organization were likely to support Mr. Smith.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Insull, the committee wants to be fair with you. The committee wants to keep within the scope of its legitimate inquiry. The committee will, of course, permit any witness to consult with counsel and give him time to do it. We are not prosecuting anybody here; we are trying to find out some facts and report back to our principals.

You say to us that you understood that the Crowe-Barrett combination were supporting Mr. McKinley, and yet that you paid money to that organization? Mr. INSULL. I did not say so, Senator. I said that before answering that question I would like to have, with your permission, an opportunity to consult counsel. I did not say whether I did or whether I did not. And yet I do not want to be in the position of refusing any information.

The CHAIRMAN. Manifestly, if you did not give any money to the CroweBarrett organization there would not be any embarrassment in saying "no." Mr. INSULL. You must draw your own inferences.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you give any money to any other candidate for the Senate?

Mr. INSULL. Yes; I gave $15,000 to my friend George Brennan; and I feel a little bit ashamed that it was not more.

The CHAIRMAN. I was going to say I do not think you treated George just right.

Mr. INSULL. If that is so, he will have to take part of the blame.

The CHAIRMAN. I want to ask you these questions. You need not answer for the present.

First, whether you gave any money to any person connected with the CroweBarrett combination; and if so, how much money and for what purpose it was understood to be used, if there was any understanding.

Second, whether you gave any money to any other organization than the Crowe-Barrett organization to be used in the last (April 13) primary or in the campaign preceding the primary-preceding the election; the names of the persons to whom the money was given and the purposes for which the money was paid and the amounts in each case.

I will say to you that the opinion of the members of the committee who are here is that where there was money used in this campaign where there were organizations or parts of organizations supporting either of these candidates, the money so employed necessarily affected the result; and you can have any reasonable time to talk with your counsel about that.

Mr. INSULL. With your permission, I prefer not to answer those questions until I have had an opportunity to consult with counsel,

The CHAIRMAN. That is perfectly all right, and we will excuse you for the present, so that you can have that consultation.

Mr. INSULL. Will you excuse me until to-morrow?

The CHAIRMAN, Yes; we will excuse you until to-morrow morning. Is that time enough?

Mr. INSULL. I think so.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well, to-morrow morning at 10 o'clock we will try to resume with you,

TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL INSULL-RESUMED

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Insull, when you were on the stand before you were asked to give the names of the persons to whom you had made contributions in the last senatorial campaign. We reached the point in your testimony where you thought you wanted to advise with your attorney with reference to giving further names, and we excused you so that you could have that opportunity; and the committee is going to ask you now to please give us the names of all persons to whom you contributed in the senatorial campaign.

Mr. INSULL. As I stated on my previous examination, I contributed $125,000 to promote the nomination at the primary of Frank L. Smith as the Republican candidate for United States Senator, and that I contributed $32,925.19 for propaganda against the adherence by the United States to the World Court; and that policy was advocated by Mr. Smith, and, of course, he benefited to that extent. The contribution was to his benefit.

I also then stated that I had contributed $15,000 to George E. Brennan in his campaign for nomination at the primary as the Democratic candidate for United States Senator.

I now wish to say that, so far as I recall, no additional moneys whatever were contributed by me to any organization or individual for the purpose of influencing the nomination at the primary of any person or persons for United States Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. You have been reading your answer, Mr. Insull.

Is that the result of your conference with your attorney?

Mr. INSULL. Well, yes and no. I happened to have the exact figures in the memorandum. But I conferred with my attorney, and I want to be as explicit as I can to the committee and want to answer all the questions that I can. The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. INSULL. But so far as contributions in connection with the nominations of United States Senators, those are all the contributions I made.

The CHAIRMAN. You gave Mr. Barrett some money, did you not?

Mr. INSULL. Well, that goes into a question that, as I understand it, does not come within the range of the powers of this committee; and if it would suit your purpose better, I would like to read a statement which I would like to go into the record.

The CHAIRMAN. You can read any statement you desire.

Mr. INSULL (reading):

"As I understand it, the precise question asked me by Senator Reed at the afternoon session of the committee on July 26, and to which the committee now desires an answer, was whether or not I made any contributions to the preprimary campaign in addition to those about which I had already testified. The question embraces contributions for promoting nominations to the many local offices involved in the primary. Nominations were made at the

6

SENATORIAL CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURES

primary for a great many State and county offices (50 or more in County), and the campaign preceding the primary included activitie individuals and political organizations in support of the various p seeking nominations for these State and county offices. I have cons counsel and I am advised by him that the Senate lacks power or jurisdi to investigate the matter of contributions in connection with the primary tion; that the Senate resolution under which the committee is acting doe authorize or purport to authorize the committee to inquire as to what cont tions, if any were made to the preprimary_campaign for purposes other tha purpose of influencing nominations for United States Senator, and that members of the committee conducting this hearing have no right to seek or co evidence relating to contributions to such campaign, particularly contribu for the purpose of promoting nominations for State and county offices. I willingly testified as to all contributions made by me to influence nominat for the Senatorship, for this is information which the Senate thinks it ough have and which by its resolution it has asked for. But when members of committee seek to go beyond the scope of the inquiry as defined in the resolu by asking questions concerning matters which the Senate has not authori them to investigate, such as contributions to promote nominations for l offices, I do not feel called upon to answer. Therefore, with all due respect the committee, I must decline, on advice of counsel, and for the reasons giv to answer the question above mentioned, asked by Senator Reed at the form session, or to state whether or not contributions were made by me to the p primary campaign for purposes other than the purpose of influencing nomi tions for United States Senator."

The CHAIRMAN. I presume, Mr. Insull, that the statement which you ha just read was prepared by your counsel?

Mr. INSULL. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And was intended as a direct challenge to the authority this committee to ascertain for itself what the money was contributed for a where it went, and to leave it to you and your counsel to decide whether th money was contributed for a particular purpose, regardless of how it was used Mr. INSULL. Is that a question or a statement?

The CHAIRMAN. I think it was quite as much a question as your documen was an answer; but if you do not care to answer, you need not.

Mr. Insull, I am now going to ask you some questions, and you will have t assume the responsibility of your answers, or refusal to answer. Did you no give, or cause to be given on your behalf, a large sum of money to Mr. Charles V Barrett, which was a contribution to be used by Mr. Barrett and his associates in the last Illinois primary, held on April 13, 1926?

Mr. INSULL. I would submit that the statement that I filed here covers the answer to that question.

The CHAIRMAN. And you decline to answer?

Mr. INSULL. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you not give to Robert E. Crowe, or cause to be given to him on your behalf, a considerable sum of money to be used in the primary to be held on the 13th day of April, 1926, in the State of Illinois?

Mr. INSULL. I make the same answer to that question, that I think it is covered by the statement that I filed with the committee.

The CHAIRMAN. And you decline to answer?

Mr. INSULL. If that is the way you want the record to read; yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. I do not want the record to read that way. I want you to

answer.

Mr. INSULL. I mean in view of my position.

The CHAIRMAN. I want an answer. Did you give any money in this primary. that I have referred to in the previous questions, to Homer Galpin?

Mr. INSULL. I would make the same answer to that question, Mr. Senator, that I think my memorandum covers the point; and I can not make any further

answer.

The CHAIRMAN. And you decline to answer?

Mr. INSULL. And I decline to answer.

The CHAIRMAN. When you gave money to Mr. Galpin did you specify, at the time you donated the money, the particular use that it was to be put to?

Mr. INSULL. I think my memorandum as filed is a reply to that question, and I decline to answer.

The CHAIRMAN. Roy O. West has testified that you gave him $10,000. Is that a fact?

Mr. INSULL. I have to make the same answer, Mr. Chairman, that the statement I presented is an answer to this whole series of questions, and I have not any more to say on that subject.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you contribute any money to promote the nomination of Senator Deneen?

Mr. INSULL. I really do not remember whether I did or not. I was trying to remember whether I was in the country at the time. I really do not remember whether I contributed or not. What was the date?

The CHAIRMAN. My recollection is that Mr. Barrett testified that you gave him $10,000. Is that a fact?

Mr. INSULL. In what connection?

The CHAIRMAN. In connection with the primary campaign. They have not all been so specific as you are, Mr. Insull.

Mr. INSULL. All I can say in reply is that I think my memorandum covers that point, and I have no further reply to make.

The CHAIRMAN. You have another memorandum here with you that shows you exactly where you contributed this money, does it not?

Mr. INSULL. You mean the memorandum I read first?

The CHAIRMAN. No; a memorandum that you had here that you referred to when you testified before.

Mr. INSULL. Yes; I have the only memorandum that I have on the subject. The CHAIRMAN. Have you not a memorandum that shows that you made the contribution I just referred to?

Mr. INSULL. What one was that?

The CHAIRMAN. The reporter will read the question.

The REPORTER (reading):

"The CHAIRMAN. My recollection is that Mr. Barrett testified that you gave him $10,000. Is that a fact?"

The CHAIRMAN. That is the question. Does not your memorandum show? Mr. INSULL. No. I can give you my memorandum here.

The CHAIRMAN. When you made this memorandum, what did you make it from? [After a pause.] You handed me this memorandum just now, did you not?

Mr. INSULL. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. That will be marked as an exhibit.

The CHAIRMAN. The first memorandum you handed me, and from which you said you had testified when you gave the amounts of your subscriptions or donations to the campaign, reads as follows [reading]:

"World Court, as per details, $28,425.19.

"Colored people, $4,500."

What has that to do with the items that you have testified to?

Mr. INSULL. The total of the two makes the $32,925.19.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Who were the colored people to whom you gave this money?

Mr. INSULL. Those expenditures in that capaign were conducted by one of my counsel, and he can give you the details. The details are all there with the exception of $4,500.

The CHAIRMAN. Who was the counsel?

Mr. INSULL. Mr. W. J. Schuyler.

The CHAIRMAN. Who made up this statement for you, Exhibit 253?

Mr. INSULL. Mr. Daniel J. Schuyler.

The CHAIRMAN. He kept some books, did he?

Mr. INSULL. I do not know. He supplied me with the statement.

The CHAIRMAN. There are no dates on this document except this:

Campaign expenditures against the World Court among foreign-language

groups, January 7, 1926, to April 15, 1926."

Do you understand those two dates and the interval between them to cover the period when this money was spent?

Mr. INSULL. I assume so; but I prefer that Mr. Schuyler should be asked that question, because I took the statement just as it was presented.

The CHAIRMAN. According to this statement, there was expended or paid to certain newspapers $2,330.85. I presume that you know in a general way, having been an old-time resident here, whether or not these are foreign-language newspapers as I read them to you. "Svornost"-that is a foreign-language newspaper, is it not?

Mr. INSULL. Yes. I think it is fair to assume that those are all foreignlanguage papers.

The CHAIRMAN. "L'Italia," etc.

You come here conceding that this money that was expended, as shown in Exhibit 253, was for the purpose of aiding Smith in his campaign by opposing entrance into the World Court. That is your position, as I understand it?

Mr. INSULL. No; I would have spent that money whether Mr. Smith was the candidate or anybody else was the candidate.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well; but you said that you counted it because it did go to his benefit by making sentiment against the World Court. That was your

testimony?

Mr. INSULL. I counted it because I did not want to be put in the position of having it developed in cross-examination that that might have helped him in the World Court fight.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. INSULL. But I would have spent that money and more, a great deal more if necessary, on that particular cause, irrespective of the candidate for United States Senator or any other office.

The CHAIRMAN. But you put it in because you thought that it might be claimed or shown that it indirectly benefited Smith in his candidacy?

Mr. INSULL. Well, I am under oath, Mr. Senator, and that is not the reason I started that campaign.

The CHAIRMAN. I did not say that. I say you put it in here to us, you reported it to us as having been expended, because you felt that it had a relation to Smith's campaign; it aided him?

Mr. INSULL. Well, if you like to put it that way; but that was not the purpose of my carrying on that campaign.

Mr. CHAIRMAN. I understand.

You say that your purpose in expending this money was to help defeat the World Court, and that you would have given it anyway; but when you were reporting the contributions you made, you put that in with the statement in substance and effect that you now reported it to the committee because you felt that it went to the benefit of Mr. Smith?

Mr. INSULL. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. So that you think that where you put money into a campaign that did influence the choice of the people in a senatorial candidate, it ought to be reported?

Mr. INSULL. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Since that is the case, and since I have asked you whether you did not give money to Mr. Barrett and Mr. Crowe, who were engaged at one and the same time through one and the same organization, substantially, in promoting the candidacy of county officers and promoting the candidacy of senatorial officers, working substantially through the same machinery, why do you not take the same position there, and say that the money you gave might have been used to affect and did affect the choice of the people for a senatorial candidate?

Mr. INSULL. Excuse me, Mr. Senator, but that question is practically asking me to take part in an argument on that subject. All I have to say on that subject has been stated in my memorandum, and I have not anything further to add to it. The CHAIRMAN. Very well. Was it not your understanding that the CroweBarrett organization, the main part of it, was promoting the candidacy of Smith? Mr. INSULL. No; that was not my information.

The CHAIRMAN. Was it your understanding that Crowe was for Smith?
Mr. INSULL. I do not know.

Mr. CHAIRMAN. Who did you understand was for Smith, among the leading men? By the way, I will ask that in another way. To whom did you give the $125,000?

Mr. INSULL. To Mr. Allen Moore. I gave it in three payments to Mr. Allen Moore, Mr. Smith's campaign manager. I gave a payment of $50,000 at one time in cash, and $50,000 another time, and $25,000 another time.

The CHAIRMAN. You knew, did you not, that Judge Crowe had publicly announced for Mr. Smith?

Mr. INSULL. I could not swear to it that I did.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you not know that he had made that statement many, many times in public?

Mr. INSULL. I was not here during the whole of this primary campaign. I left here some time in March, and I was not back here again, I think, until I should say about the 11th or 12th of May. I was out of the country during that time. I sailed on the 20th of March. I left Chicago about the 16th of March and sailed on the 20th of March, and I sailed from Southhampton on the 4th of May, so that would get me back here about the 12th or 10th.