the grand jury only because I could not with propriety refuse Mr. Carson's request.

In addition to the Henshaw charges and the "yellow ticket fraud, the court will be able to question you and Mr. Steiwer and some others about a $46,500 Steiwer campaign fund that I am told-and that I believe was contributed by some corporation men in Oregon and Eastern States prior to April 13. This $46,500 slush fund is in addition to the Steiwer campaign expenditures covered by the accounts filed with the secretary of state. If the story is true, and I believe it is, that would furnish one reason why Candidate Steiwer swore only to campaign expenditures made after the 13th day of April. Any eighth-grade schoolboy would know, on reading the law, that Mr. Steiwer's statement that he is not required to account for money spent before he filed his formal declaration of candidacy, is foolish.

The Oregonian and Mr. Steiwer will be satisfied with the grand jury report because that can not place the facts before the people. The Oregonian and Steiwer both knew that the only duty of the grand jury is either to indict him for filing a false account, which is substantially the same as an indictment for perjury, or refuse to find an indictment. The grand jury knows there is not sufficient direct legal evidence available to convict him of that crime. I am sure the grand jury knows this because I told Mr. Carson that I would make that statement to the jury. The jury will not indict Mr. Steiwer and it can not be just criticized on that account.

The only trial I ever wanted, the only trial any man can want if he seeks the truth is a public trial in a civil case before the circuit court. But you, Mr. Editor, and your candidate will immediately proclaim that the action of the grand jury in failing to find a true bill is itself a complete vindication of Steiwer.

Your candidate dare not and will not demand a public trial. Will the Oregonian demand one for him? Will the Oregonian try to sneer this challenge off by asking as it did in an editorial of August 26, that if all the charges made are true, and even if Mr. Steiwer was the instigator of the "yellow ticket," what of it? The Oregonian can not hide its man Steiwer behind President Coolidge as it also tried to do in the same editorial. The President is not in this controversy. He is not the kind of a man to say 'What of it?" if the charges made against Mr. Steiwer are true. President Coolidge is not the kind of a man to sneer at a "yellow ticket" fraud or at any other kind of fraud or falsehood perpetrated by a candidate for the office of United States Senator or any other office.

66

I am told, and I believe it is true, that a considerable part of the $46,500 slush fund contributions above mentioned were given because of the personal solicitation of the editor of the Oregonian. That was not against the law, but if it is true, perhaps the Oregonian could tell the voters and the court who received and expended some of the money. The law does not require an account from those who merely contribute money. As to who received or expended this fund, I have no knowledge or information.

There is plenty of time to have this trial in the circuit court if you act promptly. All the witnesses can be heard. the trial can be completed and the decision of the court rendered in ample time before the election to completely vindicate your candidate if he is not guilty of filing a false account.

W. S. U'REN.

A. I don't think I mailed that. You know my office is in the Oregonian Building, and every once in a while I go up to the editor's office up there, and I took this up, expecting to meet Edgar himself, about 11 o'clock, because that is his usual hour, but he had not come down yet, and I left it. But this is the letter.

Q. By Mr. LOGAN. This money was given for the Stiewer campaign. You made no implication that Mr. Piper got the money? Senator MCNARY. He said that three times.

Mr. LOGAN. I want to be sure about that.

Senator MCNARY. I am quite sure about that. I am not confused about it.

A. No; I have a good deal of respect for Mr. Piper.

Senator MCNARY. Just a minute, gentlemen. These proceedings must be under control at all times. That will be all, Mr. U‘Ren.

(Thereupon an adjournment was taken until 1.45 o'clock p. m. of this day, Wednesday, October 27, 1926, at which time the hearing resumed pursuant to adjournment; whereupon the following proceedings were had.)

Senator MCNARY. The meeting will come to order. Mr. Watkins and Mr. U’Ren, do you desire further to submit proof?

TESTIMONY OF SENATOR ROBERT N. STANFIELD

Senator ROBERT N. STANFIELD was thereupon produced as a witness and, being first duly sworn, testified as follows:

Senator MCNARY. Senator, the Senate Committee on Campaign Expenditures has under consideration the matters contained in a telegram of Mr. George Putnam, of Salem, addressed to Senator James A. Reed, our colleague, in Missouri. It involves a charge that certain sums of money were contributed by Eastern capitalists or individuals, or an organization, to the Portland Oregonian, to be used in the campaign for Mr. Steiwer. That is the subject matter of the investigation this morning and this afternoon. You voluntarily have appeared as a witness, and any testimony or statement that you desire to make in that regard would be very much appreciated by the committee. Just do it in your own way, Senator.

A. The first intimation I had of money being paid to Mr. Steiwer's campaign, or contributed to his campaign fund in a large way, came to me from Mr. Asa B. Thompson, who told me that some one connected with a power and light company of Spokane had told to him and another gentleman, or to another gentleman in his presence, that $10,000 had been contributed by Franklin T. Griffith, an a further contribution of $25,000 was to be made. That was the first intimation, briefly and concisely.

Q. (By Senator MCNARY.) Do you remember, Senator Stanfield. about the date that that statement was made to you by Mr. Thompson?

A. I think it was either just prior to or about the 1st of September. Q. Of the present year?

A. Of this year, yes.

Q. You may proceed, Senator.

A. After that time, Mr. Walter Hayes, former secretary of Theodore Roosevelt, came here from New York to visit me, and he told me that his friends interested in power companies in the East-that some of them had told him that money was sent by power people for the support of Steiwer's compaign fund. I then told him what Mr. Thompson had told me, and he said that he believed it to be the one and the same transaction that he had knowledge about. I asked Mr. Hayes to make a further investigation and to let me know. That he has not done. In fact, I had rather given up the idea that anything would come out of the information that had come to me. I think that briefly that covers the knowledge I have.

Q. Senator Stanfield, when did you and Mr. Hayes first confer together and discuss this subject?

A. It was after he came to Portland.

Q. What date was that, Senator?

A. Now, I haven't in mind the date, Senator.

Q. Was it this summer or fall?

A. Oh, it was some time--yes; it was some time

Q. Let me refresh your memory. Perhaps you haven't had the matter much in mind recently.

A. No; I have not.

Q. That the testimony of Mr. U'Ren indicated that on the 10th day of September that you and Mr. Hayes and Mr. U'Ren went to Salem together?

A. On or about that time, that date.

Q. Well, it was about that time that you discussed this matter with Mr. Hayes?

A. He was here a few days, and it was at that visit.

Q. It was just prior, then, to the 10th of September, according to your best recollection?

A. Yes; if that is the right date. I haven't it in mind, but I presume it is.

Q. That is the indisputable testimony, that it was the 10th of September that you were all thrown together.

A. It was the same date Mr. Hayes and I called on you office in Salem. That was the same time.

in your Q. I remember that hesitation. I don't remember the date. I suppose that is sufficiently accurate. What did Mr. Hayes say in detail about the nature of his information or informants? Did he tell you, Senator, who told him about it?

A. As to the individual-he told me he had been visiting with some of his friends that were associated and interested in the power business in the East, in New York, and, I think, at

Q. Philadelphia?

A. Philadelphia-and that this discussion had come up, and that was the information that had been given to him, was that money had been sent out for the support of the Steiwer campaign fund.

Q. At that time did he indicate to you by specifying the amounts of the sums that had been sent to Oregon, or the dates thereof, or the uses to be made of the money?

A. No; he didn't. He didn't tell me any specific sum. I told him then in the general conversation that ensued about what Mr. Thompson told me.

Q. When did Mr. Thompson talk to you about this matter?

A. Well, it must have been in the latter part of August, because it was some time prior to the introduction of Mr. Hayes.

Q. Did Mr. Hayes think that your conversation with Mr. Thompson and your conversation with him was directed to the same individuals who might know something of this transaction?

A. Yes. Yes, I think, quite naturally, that was the conclusion. Q. You found the two reports to be similar in their nature?

A. Well, to this extent, that Mr. Thompson had conveyed to me the idea from the conversation that he had that these interests had contributed largely to Mr. Steiwer's campaign fund, and the fact that Mr. Hayes had heard from his power friends in the East that money had been contributed.

Q. Did you request at any time that Mr. Hayes make a further survey of this situation and confirm what his statement was that he had made to you?

A. I did ask him if he wouldn't, at his convenience, attempt to determine more specifically what had occurred and get all the information he could relative to the matter and impart it to me.

Q. Did he communicate to you further by conversation or by written letters or by messages?

A. No; he hasn't. The subject has never been discussed.

Q. This was on the 10th of September, or thereabouts. How soon did he leave Oregon?

A. Well, he was only here a few days; I think three or four days. Q. Has he returned to Oregon, to your knowledge?

A. No; he has not returned to Oregon. He has advised me that he expected to be here some time in the latter part of this month. Q. Have you seen him since his departure for the East?

A. No; I have not.

Q. Have you had any communication with him, or correspondence of any kind concerning this particular matter?

A. I have not had any correspondence with him pertaining to this matter.

Q. Had you expected that he would further advise you concerning the substantiation or want of substantiability of these charges? A. I had expected he would, yes; at his convenience. I have not crowded him. My time has been so much taken and occupied with other things and I didn't know that an investigation of this kind was going to come up.

Q. You will doubtless recall your visit to Mr. Putnam in Salem in company with Mr. Hayes?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you hear the conversation that took place there in the presence of Mr. Putnam?

A. No; I didn't hear the conversation, nor neither did Mr. Hayes ever tell me anything about having had the conversation with Mr. Putnam.

Q. Did you have in mind at this time the conversations you had with Mr. Crain, the city editor of the Salem Journal?

A. The what?

Q. With anyone connected with Mr. Putnam's paper?

A. With Mr. Crain?

Q. Crain?

A. At what time?

Q. Well, any time after your conversation had between Mr. Crain and Mr. Hayes at the Capital Journal office in Salem on the 10th day of September, 1926?

A. I don't recall anything until just a few days ago when I was in Salem, that I did have a conversation with him.

Q. Have you at any time, Senator Stanfield, communicated with Mr. Hayes in any fashion whatsoever asking him to supplement or concern the statements made to you concerning this contribution? A. Not until yesterday.

Q. Did you yesterday?

A. I did yesterday.

Q. Have you heard from Mr.

A. I have not.

Q. Does that complete the general statement you desire to make in regard to this matter, Senator?

A. It does.

Senator McNARY. Mr. Watkins? Or Mr. U'Ren?

Q. (By Mr. WATKINS.) Let me ask you, Senator, if you have any further information with respect to any other contributions of larger size for Senator Steiwer's campaign-Mr. Steiwer's campaign? Any large sums?

A. I have only knowledge that has come to me by a man telling me that a certain citizen here had told him. Is that what you want me to

Q. Yes, I want to know

A. All right, Ferdinand E. Reed told me that Lair W. Thompson told him that he had paid over to Steiwer's campaign fund a sum of somewhere between ten and twelve thousand dollars.

Mr. LOGAN. Where did you get it?

Mr. THOMPSON. I never had it.

Q. (By Mr. WATKINS.) Did he say anything about the source— what else did he say about it?

A. Well, we were talking about the campaign expenditures, and about Mr. Steiwer's report of only having spent $8,900 in his campaign, which appeared to us as rather ridiculous, from knowledge that we have of the cost of the conduct of a state-wide campaign, and he then ventured that information to me.

Q. Is that the whole line of conversation between you and Mr. Reed about that, or did Mr. Reed say anything about where the money came from?

A. Well, he didn't tell me that Mr. Thompson told him where the money came from, but Reed said, "Of course, part of that money, or all of it either part or all of it came from Mr. Joseph R. Bowles, a brother in law of Mr. Thompson." However, I am not stating that he told me that Mr. Thompson told him that, because I do not recall it in that way.

Q. What I am trying to get at is the entire conversation that passed between you and Mr. Ferdinand Reed. That is what I was asking.

A. Yes.

Q. And that is approximately and in substance the report that Mr. Reed told you?

A. That is.

Mr. WATKINS. I think that is all.

Mr. THOMPSON. Senator, may I ask a question?

Senator MCNARY. Yes; I was just waiting for that.

Q. (By Mr. THOMPSON.) Did you agree with anybody that you would endeavor to get definite information to back up the hearsay stuff of Mr. Walter Hayes after he made you that statement?

A. Yes, I did.

Q. With whom did you make that agreement?

A. With Harry Crain.

Q. And did you make the effort to get the substantiation for the statement?

A. Yes, I have.

Q. And only yesterday, you say?

A. Only yesterday.

Q. During all this period of time from September 10 until now you made no effort to get a substantiation?