Mr. MARTIN. And you had, prior to that time, been practicing by yourself?

Mr. HAMMOND. I had.

Mr. MARTIN. How long have you known Mr. Horace Havemeyer? Mr. HAMMOND. Since the 16th day of August, 1909.

Mr. MARTIN. You had never met him personally prior to that time? Mr. HAMMOND. I had not.

Mr. MARTIN. Your firm, however, knew Mr. Havemeyer very well, did it not, prior to that time?

Mr. HAMMOND. I do not think any member of the firm had ever met Mr. Havemeyer before that time; that is my impression.

Mr. MARTIN. You referred to the litigation in which Mr. Johnson represented the American Sugar Refining Co. Is that the litigation it became involved in on account of the Pennsylvania Sugar Refining Co.-the failure of that company?

Mr. HAMMOND. Well, I had supposed Mr. Johnson had represented them in that and other matters as counsel, and that was one of the matters I referred to.

Mr. MARTIN. But I understood you to say that the firm of Strong & Cadwaladar also represented the American Sugar Refining Co. in that same action?

Mr. HAMMOND. My recollection is that Mr. Henry W. Taft was one of the trial counsel; I do not know about that; that was before I became a member of the firm; that is only hearsay since.

Mr. MARTIN. Do you know whether, in addition to the company itself being a defendant in those actions, the directors were joined as defendants?

The CHAIRMAN. In what way does that affect the interior department of the Philippine Islands?

Mr. MARTIN. Well, what I was getting at is this: I understand that Mr. Horace Havemeyer, a director of the American Sugar Refining Co., was personally made a defendant in those actions, and that the firm of Strong & Cadwalader were associated with the defense, were of counsel for the defense?

Mr. DOUGLAS. What of that?

The CHAIRMAN. How does that affect the matter under inquiry? Mr. MARTIN. Well, Mr. Hammond might not have known Mr. Horace Havemeyer, but the firm of which he was a member not only knew him, but had acted as his counsel in this litigation.

The CHAIRMAN. Suppose they had?

Mr. MARTIN. If they had, I have been at a loss to understand why Mr. Horace Havemeyer should have needed an introduction from Mr. Johnson to a member of a firm which had acted as his counsel in such important litigation.

Mr. HAMMOND. My understanding is that Mr. Taft had never seen Mr. Havemeyer up to this time; whether he has seen him since that time I do not know.

The CHAIRMAN. Your question or suggestion rather touches upon the credibility of the witness who said his firm did not know Mr. Havemeyer. Is that the idea, Mr. Martin?

Mr. MARTIN. I did not understand Mr. Hammond to say his firm did not know Mr. Havemeyer; he said he did not know Mr. Have

meyer.

The CHAIRMAN. And he said he understood his firm did not know him.

Mr. MARTIN. His firm had been of counsel for the defense in these suits in which Mr. Havemeyer, as a director of the American Sugar Refining Co., was joined as a defendant; I therefore asked whether Mr. Havemeyer was not as well acquainted with this firm as he was with Mr. Johnson and would not need any introduction to a member of the firm of Cadwaladar & Strong.

Mr. HAMMOND. I understand Mr. Havemeyer knows Mr. Johnson very well; I understand he does not know Mr. Taft at all; he may have casually met him in court, or something of that kind. You can ask Mr. Havemeyer about that; he is here. I can not testify to that, of course; I do not know. Mr. Taft was away at this time and therefore he was not there to introduce us. As far as I know, Mr. Havemeyer had never been in the office of Strong & Cadwaladar prior to that time. You can also ask him that; I really do not know. Mr. MADISON. Was Mr. Johnson's direction to Mr. Havemeyer to see you personally or the firm of Strong & Cadwaladar?

Mr. HAMMOND. Mr. Johnson and I had been associated for years in some other matters, in connection with some litigation in various States, in Texas and other States; for a number of years I was attorney for some bankers and he was senior counsel.

Mr. MADISON. My question was

Mr. HAMMOND. I was just going to say that Mr. Johnson told Mr. Havemeyer to see Mr. Hammond, or referred him to me; I really do not know what he did tell him; I only know that Mr. Havemeyer stated that Mr. Johnson had referred him to me as a lawyer who might look after the matter, and this was before I became a member of the firm, because Mr. Johnson, in the closing months of 1908 or early in 1909, happened to ask me whether young Mr. Horace Havemeyer had been in to see me. My recollection is it was shortly after Mr. Havemeyer's father's death that the matter happened to impress itself on my mind.

Mr. MARTIN. Where is Mr. Johnson's office?

Mr. HAMMOND. In the Land Title Building, Philadelphia, Pa. Mr. MARTIN. So when you went to consult with Mr. Johnson about this transaction, who accompanied you?

Mr. HAMMOND. Mr. Welch and Mr. Horace Havemeyer.

Mr. MARTIN. You had to go to Philadelphia?

Mr. HAMMOND. Yes.

Mr. MARTIN. When did you go there first?

Mr. HAMMOND. My recollection is it was about the 13th of September, 1909; that is the only time we did go.

Mr. MARTIN. At that time you had made an investigation of the Philippine land laws?

Mr. HAMMOND. Yes; but my recollection is I did not discuss Philippine laws with Mr. Johnson; I did not feel qualified to pass upon that, because I was not a Manila lawyer. I had looked over the general statutes as to aliens purchasing lands-that is, aliens from the standpoint of non-Filipinos-to ascertain whether there was a limitation on the amount that a corporation could acquire, and matters of that kind, not the question of titles; I had made no investigation on that point.

Mr. MARTIN. That was about September 13 and was after you had called in person at the Insular Bureau at Washington and had been furnished certain information touching Philippine lands and land laws?

Mr. HAMMOND. The only information I got from the Bureau of Insular Affairs was copies of Philippine laws and copies of the first acts, I believe, of the Philippine Legislature and a small pamphlet, as well as the general information that Maj. McIntyre gave me to the effect that no corporation could acquire and hold over 2,500 acres of any kind of land in the Philippines.

Mr. MARTIN. With that information before you, and after an examination of the laws, you still had a doubt in your mind as to the status of the friar lands?

Mr. HAMMOND. As far as purchasing them I had a doubt, because Mr. McIntyre said they were not for sale in large amounts.

Mr. MARTIN. What sort of lands did you talk over at the Insular Bureau?

Mr. HAMMOND. We did not talk over any lands, so far as I recollect, except the general subject of public lands, friar lands, and private lands that is, we did not talk over lands so much as we did what could be done.

Mr. MARTIN. When was the San Jose estate first mentioned to you? Mr. HAMMOND. I think it may have come up at almost any of the interviews; that I do not know; my recollection is it was around the 1st of September that Mr. Welch told me he understood the San Jose estate was being offered for sale to one individual.

Mr. MARTIN. Did you not talk over the purchase of that estate at the Insular Bureau?

Mr. HAMMOND. I do not think so, except that I may have asked Maj. McIntyre whether it was being offered for sale to one individual. Mr. MARTIN. Have you seen Gen. Edwards's statement that you had called there with reference to the purchase of that particular estate?

Mr. HAMMOND. I have not seen that statement, no; but if that statement is made, if correct, it could only relate to my inquiries as to whether or not that was being offered for sale in the Philippines, because that was my information at that time.

Mr. MARTIN. If you were shown a copy of the articles of incorporation of the Mindoro Development Co. could you say whether or not it was substantially the draft that you had made for a corporation to conduct and operate a sugar mill, etc., there?

Mr. HAMMOND. I might be able to do so.

Mr. MARTIN. Do you remember whether the draft you prepared contained a provision to the effect that the proposed corporation could buy, own, and vote the stocks of other corporations and exercise all rights of ownership pertaining thereto?

Mr. HAMMOND. I think it did, because every corporation I have formed has that right; my recollection is that we do that now.

Mr. MARTIN. Before going into this matter at all you addressed Mr. Henry W. Taft about the advisability of so doing, did you not? Mr. HAMMOND. I do not think I wrote Mr. Taft until the 30th of August.

Mr. MARTIN. Mr. Taft, in this letter that you refer to as having been sent to Mr. Bennet, stated that you wrote him and asked whether

he thought there was any objection to your acting in the matter, and that he answered that he saw no harm in it if it did not "involve our securing from either the Philippine or the United States Government any action resting in discretion." Now, what consultations, personally, if any, did you have with Mr. Taft?

Mr. HAMMOND. I had none; he was away on a vacation.

Mr. MARTIN. Had you at any time prior to your withdrawal or the turning of this matter over to Mr. de Gersdorf had any conversations with Mr. Taft?

Mr. HAMMOND. My recollection is I had none whatever; I do not ever remember talking to him at any time, even afterwards.

Mr. MARTIN. Did you address any letter to him after you addressesd this letter in which you asked if there was any objection to your entering into the negotiations?

Mr. HAMMOND. I did; I wrote him that we had withdrawn and turned the matter over to Mr. Leffingwell.

Mr. MARTIN. Then there was nothing that passed between you and Mr. Taft between the time you wrote for his opinion, and secured it, and the time that you wrote as to your withdrawal?

Mr. HAMMOND. I think I may have written him that we were going to withdraw, because I had to write him once or twice a week on firm matters, and I may have referred to the fact that we had determined we would withdraw.

Mr. MARTIN. Now, if you did write him, what reasons did you assign?

Mr. HAMMOND. On the ground that it might involve the exercise of discretion.

Mr. MARTIN. I notice he says in his letter that a time arrived when you thought you ought to retire from the matter, "lest our connection with it would be misconstrued." You meant by that that the time arrived when you came to the conclusion that discretionary action would be involved upon the part of Government officials?

Mr. HAMMOND. Well, I do not know whether it was that or not, but in view of the fact that they expected to buy this estate, or seemed to have it in mind to buy this land, to which the title was defective, and it would be necessary to get that title perfected by the Government, which would involve the exercise of discretion, or if they bought either public lands or friar lands, the question of price would be involved, it seemed to me it would be better to have it looked after by some one against whom nothing of this kind could be raised.

Mr. MARTIN. Did not the doubt in your mind go to the matter of title?

Mr. HAMMOND. I never got that far.

Mr. MARTIN. Did not it go to the question of the laws applying to those lands and your doubt as to the right of the Government to sell friar lands in bulk?

Mr. HAMMOND. No; it did not get that far, because I never got down to the question of title; I did not get that far into the matter. They had sent or had communicated with their representative in the Philippines to find out the situation. I told them that in New York I could not possibly advise them as to titles in the Philippines and that I had not sufficient information at my command to advise them on those points, and they would have to get a lawyer in the Philippines and have him pass upon the legal situation.

Mr. MARTIN. You were in a position to determine the question of law involved?

Mr. HAMMOND. There was no doubt about that in my mind; that was fundamental; it seemed to me that no corporation could buy over 2,500 acres in the Philippines except irrigation companies, my recollection is, or something of that kind; certainly no agricultural corporation could, I think, acquire more than 2,500 acres; there was no doubt about that; I do not think anybody would doubt that, and that was confirmed by what Maj. McIntyre said.

Mr. MARTIN. Mr. Henry W. Taft says, in his letter, that in addition to your letter of October 23, in which you stated that this matter had been turned over to the firm of Cravath, Henderson & De Gersdorff, you wrote four other letters?

Mr. HAMMOND. Four other letters to whom-to the department? Mr. MARTIN. Four letters to the War Department in addition to the one of October 23. Now, in the letter from the Secretary of War, transmitting full and complete information to the House of Representatives relative to the sale of the friar lands in the Philippine Islands I only find reference to one other letter written by you, which is the letter of September 7, 1909, acknowledging the receipt of certain documents and information from the Bureau of Insular Affairs, and that appears to be the only other letter in addition to the one of October 23, set out in this document. Do you have any recollection about the other three letters?

Mr. HAMMOND. Why, I wrote to them asking for whatever documents they had; I received a letter and replied to it, thanking them for their promise to send forward what documents they had; they sent me copies of pamphlets late in September, which I also acknowledged, and then this letter of October 23, which I acknowledged, and the letter acknowledging the opinion of the attorney general of the Philippines, that I think Maj. McIntyre had referred to and had not in hand, which he sent to me, and which I acknowledged. Those are the only letters I remember.

Mr. MARTIN. That makes how many, all told?

Mr. HAMMOND. I think that is four or five; five, I think.

Mr. MARTIN. If there was no discretion involved in this transaction there would not have been any objection to your firm acting in the matter?

Mr. HAMMOND. Not the slightest that I saw, and Mr. Taft said if it was a question merely of buying land in the Philippines he did not see any reason why we should not act; more than that, we would have to go out of business if we could not represent anybody. Mr. MARTIN. Do you remember the amount of the fee that was paid for the work you did do?

Mr. HAMMOND. Yes, sir; a thousand dollars.

Mr. MARTIN. Who paid that fee?

Mr. HAMMOND. I think Mr. Welch; I am not sure whose check it was; my recollection is I got Mr. Welch's check.

Mr. MARTIN. You think it was his personal check?

Mr. HAMMOND. That is my impression; I would not say, because it may have been Mr. Welch's check or his firm's check; I do not

know.

Mr. MARTIN. It was just signed by one person?