Memorandum showing cases, civil and 'criminal, on the Biloxi (Miss.) docket in which William H. Armbrecht was appointed as special United States attorney, June 1, 1910-Continued. HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ON HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 103 TO INVESTIGATE THE EXPENDITURES IN THE JUNE 10, 1911 WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE EXPENDITURES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. COMMITTEE ON EXPENDITURES IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The committee met at 10 o'clock a. m., Hon. Jack Beall (chairman) presiding. TESTIMONY OF MR. HENRY A. WISE. (The witness was duly sworn by the chairman.) The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Wise, you are district attorney for the southern district of New York, I believe Mr. WISE. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. For what length of time have you held that position? Mr. WISE. I was appointed as of the 1st of April, 1909, and qualified about the 8th of April, 1909. The CHAIRMAN. How long have you been a resident of New York? Mr. WISE. Since 1888. Of course, I took that residence because I was under age at that time, and my father became a resident then. My actual residence has existed since 1894. The CHAIRMAN. How long have you been a member of the bar there? Mr. WISE. Since June, 1897. The CHAIRMAN. Prior to your appointment as United States district attorney, you were a practicing lawyer there? Mr. WISE. I have practiced continuously since 1897, with the exception of the period from May, 1898, to July, 1899, when I was in the United States Army. The CHAIRMAN. With what office were you connected in New York? Mr. WISE. I was a lawyer and working with my father, John S. Wise, from the time of my admission to the bar until I went away in May, 1898, and when I returned in July, 1899, I became his partner, and he and I practiced law under the firm name of J. S. & H. A. Wise from then up to the present time, you may say. And later my brother, John S. Wise, jr., came into that firm, and that is the composition of the firm at present. But since my appointment in April, 1909, as United States attorney, I have not practiced law at all, and I have not received any part of the income of that firm except from business which was terminated and the fees earned prior to my appointment as district attorney. The CHAIRMAN. Prior to your appointment as district attorney, had your firm in any manner represented the United States Sugar Refining Co.? Mr. WISE. You mean the American Sugar Refining Co.? The CHAIRMAN. Yes; the American Sugar Refining Co. Mr. WISE. No, sir; nor any other. The only business my law firm at any time has ever done for any sugar company was a retainer that I took from the Federal Sugar Refining Co. about four years ago, when I appeared before the Interstate Commerce Commission for the Federal Sugar Refining Co. in a question where the American Sugar Refining Co. was on the other side. That was a question of lighterage limit, and it is in the Supreme Court now, I believe. It has just recently been decided by the Commerce Court. They overruled the finding of the Interstate Commerce Commission, which was in our favor. The CHAIRMAN. Had you been connected in any way or represented the American Tobacco Co.? Mr. WISE. Never; no, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Or the United States Steel Corporation? Mr. WISE. No; I think the only client that my firm ever had that was in any way connected with the Steel Co. was about 1897, which, of course, was before the formation of the United States Steel Corporation, when we represented Thomas Marshall, of Pittsburg, who is long since dead, in a litigation involving the supplying of the structural steel for the post-office building in New York City. The CHAIRMAN. By these questions I am not meaning to suggest there would have been anything improper if you had represented them, but I just want to get the matter in the record. Mr. WISE. Yes; I have never been fortunate enough to have any big clients. The CHAIRMAN. You have been connected with the prosecution of suits on behalf of the Government against the American Sugar Refining Co.? Mr. WISE. I wanted to say that perhaps you did not know I have been in the United States attorney's office since the 1st day of August, 1902. The CHAIRMAN. Well, before your appointment, then, as United States attorney, you were an assistant? Mr. WISE. I went into that office as the junior assistant, and gradually moved up until I was the senior assistant under Mr. Stimson, and upon his retirement I was appointed by President Taft to the head of the office. The CHAIRMAN. You have been connected with the office, then, during all the litigation against the American Sugar Refining Co., both on the civil side of the docket and the criminal? Mr. WISE. Civil and criminal; in almost every form of procedure known to Federal jurisprudence. The CHAIRMAN. You have instituted suits, I believe, for the dissolution of the American Sugar Refining Co.? Mr. WISE. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. And you have also had indictments against the corporation and different individuals connected with it for violations of the Sherman antitrust law? Mr. WISE. Yes, sir. |