nation one of the attorneys for the United States asked him this question:

Q. Here is a paper (marked number 5), did you hand that to Mr. Kellogg? Was that the application?-A. Yes, sir.

This was the paper that I have called your attention to here, with "I concur" at the bottom of it.

Then the counsel asked him, "Did you also hand him the other papers connected with the Corpus Christi route?" and he answered, I believe, that he handed the applications on both routes to me. Now, on his crossexamination this occurs:

Q. I wish to show you this paper (No. 5) that was shown you yesterday, and see if you are not mistaken as to having given that paper to Mr. Kellogg. Notice the indorsement on the back of it. It seems to have been filed in the Department on the 10th of July.-A. [After examining the paper.] I never noticed the indorsement on the back. But it is usual, in making applications for service, to have the application indorsed before the filing of the paper.

Q. No, no; but here is a paper filed in the Department on the 10th of July, as shown by the file mark. So you must be mistaken about having given that paper to Senator Kellogg.-A. Well, quite possibly.

Mr. INGERSOLL. Just ask him if he took it off the files.

Q. You did not take it off the files after you had put it there?-A. No, sir.

Q. I find here the name of J. B. Elam, M. C., of Louisiana; do you know him?-A. Very well.

Q. Who was he?-A. He was the Congressinan representing that district.

Q. The district in which this service was to be performed?-—A. Yes, sir; Shreveport.

Q. And E. W. Robertson's name, sixth district, also appears; who is he?-A. A Congressman from Baton Rouge, La.

Q. He was a member of Congress at that time?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Both of these gentlemen have signed this application of yours?—A. Yes, sir; I carried it to them and they signed it.

Q. Do you not recollect, also, of carrying that application to Senator Kellogg, and that he signed it, and that then you went and filed it with all those names upon it ?— A. I carried it to him and he signed it.

Q. Do you not remember carrying it to the Department?-A. I do not remember filing it, but I surmise that it must have been filed, since you called my attention to the indorsement.

Q. So that, as to that, you must be mistaken in what you stated yesterday. How long did this interview last between you and Senator Kellogg, to which you have referred-A. It was of very short duration.

Q. How many minutes, do you think?-A. A few minutes, I could not surmise.

There is a good deal bearing upon this part of the case, and while I am speaking of this testimony I want to say that Mr. Price states here two points. When he speaks of the drafts having been given to me he is asked this question: "Q. That was the end of the matter?-A. Yes. I don't suppose there was a word said. I handed them to him and walked off." Mr. Price, I think, says that he put the drafts in the envelope, handed them to me, and walked off.

Now, I want to ask your attention to his testimony on one other point, namely, the immunity that he was to receive. On cross-examination he gave the following testimony on that point:

Q. You were indicted, were you?—A. I was.

Q. And you had been indicted before you went before the grand jury?—A. I had been.

Q. And that indictment is still pending, so far as you know?-A. It is.

Q. I want you to state whether immunity has been promised you from prosecution on this pending indictment against you in the event that you would testify before the grand jury, and in these cases against Brady and Kellogg -A. Personally, it has not. Q. What has been done about it ?-A. But my friends have given me the assurance that if I came forward and testified to the facts, immunity would be granted. Q. Are you relying upon that?-A. You may draw your own inference.

By the CHAIRMAN:

Q. That testimony which you have been reading be the testimony of Mr. Price in court on the trial?-A. Yes, sir. Now I want to settle this matter of the service right here. If there be any further evidence necessary I will give the committee the names of four or five gentlemen, one of them a gentleman formerly connected with the prosecution, to whom Mr. Price has admitted that I had nothing whatever to do with the matter of procuring this service. I have the affidavits here of two witnesses, and I can give you the names of two or three others in addition, if it be desired, who will swear that Mr. Price has stated, repeatedly and explicitly, that, so far as Kellogg was concerned, he did not procure the service; that these transactions were entirely with Walsh; that Walsh got the expedition; that his (Price's) dealings in that respect were with Walsh, and that I had nothing whatever to do with the matter.

By Mr. VAN ALSTYNE:

Q. Do you say that Price has made an affidavit over his own signature to the effect that he has made such statements?—A. Oh, no. I say that I have here the affidavits, and that I can produce three or four witnesses who will testify that he has made such statements, and I can give the committee their names, if they are desired. When Mr. Cook was an attorney in the star-route cases he had an interview in New York with Price, who stated there explicitly to Mr. Cook and one or two other persons that he had had no dealings with me whatever in relation to these two expeditions. I am glad that the gentleman (Mr. Van Alstyne) interrupted me, because I do not wish to be misunderstood. I make no charges or accusations against Mr. Price. I state the facts as I understand them, and as I gather them from the evidence, those matters that are not within my own knowledge. The matters within my own knowledge I state, of course, upon that knowledge, and am responsible for them. I do not believe that Mr. Price desired to give this testimony against me. He was a sick man, and is still, and I think he is the best man among them-far superior to Mr. Walsh, in my opinion, whatever Mr. Bliss and others may say about the matter. I think that Mr. Price, being a sick man, and having been indicted, this matter troubled him very much, and he is a very sensitive man, and I suppose he felt that he must get out from under the indictment; so, for that purpose, he made a statement about his giving me the drafts. Mr. Price made that statement about giving me the drafts, leaving it to be inferred that I had some business relations with him in this matter. You will observe that all these witnesses testify that they rely upon Walsh. Mr. Merrick testifies that he relied upon Walsh; Mr. Bliss testifies that he relied upon Walsh; nobody seemed to rely upon Price. Walsh was their reliance, and not so much Walsh's parol testimony as his papers, the letters and telegrams that he was ready to produce bearing upon this question, which, as he averred, would incul pate me.

Before I leave the question of service I want to say a word in regard to these drafts. Originally, I had intended to go into this matter fully and state the origin of this thing as I understand it, fortifying myself with such facts and documentary evidence as I could procure to show the animus of this attack upon me, and the cause of its being pressed against me. I think it must have occurred to the committee that there must have been some overpowering motive influencing Mr. Walsh-a man whom I had befriended; a man in regard to whom it would be easy

for me to prove to-day by twenty witnesses that I had for years been uniformly his friend. Why, Mr. Raum, the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, said to me a few months since, "Kellogg, you ought to have let me send Walsh to the penitentiary." It is well known that Mr. Walsh was mixed up with our politics in Louisiana; that he got into a difficulty with Governor Warmoth; that when Warmoth and I were squabbling over State affairs Walsh stood with me, and that I had a friendly feeling for him. He is a man of education, and a man of considerable adroitness and suavity, a companionable man, and I have felt kindly toward him, and have rendered him one unbroken line of favors, running through years. Indeed, I understand that he stated before this committee, in the course of his testimony, that he felt very kindly toward me, and that I had been a friend of his, yet, strange to say, he went before the Mitchell grand jury and, as he told me afterwards, and as he repeatedly stated in his evidence, indicated, in a sentence or two, that he had received certain drafts from me, thus connecting me with this matter. Mr. Bliss says that Walsh did not produce any papers before that grand jury, and it is known to the committee that that grand jury did not find an indictment. There was no grievance there. There was no reason why he should have felt bad about that. But we next find him going to Mr. Merrick, two weeks later, and telling him that he feels aggrieved because he was not permitted to tell all he knew in regard to me before the Mitchell grand jury. He complains about that to Mr. Merrick, and says he wants to be "vindicated." Mr. Merrick tells

him that he will see that he is vindicated, and that he has a fair show; that he shall have a chance to get before the grand jury again, and that he (Merrick) will have the grand jury reconvened for that purpose. Mr. Merrick says that he was very anxious that Walsh should testify in the case pending against Dorsey and Brady, and that he told him that if he would testify in that case he would see that he was vindicated. Perhaps I had better read a portion of Mr. Merrick's testimony on that point, which has been handed to me. He says, page 599 of your record:

I continued to urge him to testify in the Dorsey-Brady case, and said that I would see that justice was done to him; that he should have an opportunity of vindicating himself; that I would cause the grand jury to be reconvened, and that he should go before them again and give his testimony in regard to Kellogg, which would be the best vindication he could have. He said that if I would do that he would testify in the Dorsey-Brady case; that all he wanted was to be vindicated and fairly treated. I told him I would see that he was both vindicated and fairly treated, and would have the grand jury reconvened. Mr. Walsh did testify in the Dorsey-Brady case, as you are all aware.

I call attention to this to show that Mr. Walsh was very anxious to get before all these grand juries, and when he got before the Hutchinson grand jury they listened to him for two days. Now, if I had time, and the committee cared to go into that, I would show them the animus of this thing from letters received by me containing extracts from newspapers of a very suggestive character; and I would also show them the process served upon me, demanding my attendance in court for the purpose of testifyingn is ubstantiation of a claim that Walsh had made against Brady. I would show the committee that Walsh desired that I should assist him in procuring from Brady, or from the contractors, some forty and odd thousand dollars, which he claimed he should receive.

Q. Should receive from whom?—A. Either from Brady or the contractors or some one. However, I do not care to go into that now.

By Mr. STEWART:

Q. Do you mean to say that before he gave his testimony, and before he had that interview with Mr. Merrick, you had been importuned, by letter or otherwise, to aid him in recovering a claim which he had against Brady or against the Government?-A. I do, sir.

Q. What had you done in reply to those requests?-A. I had utterly refused. It is a long story. We had had some difficulty in regard to the matter. It would consume so much of the time of the committee that I do not care to go into it now; but, at the time he had his interview with Mr. Merrick, he intimated that he wanted to see me, and I did see him. He demanded then that I should aid him in procuring his claims against Brady, and it was after that time, or about that time, that he first indicated that he had had notes of Brady's. He had made the statement which Mr. Bliss has produced here, and which I have read; a statement revised and corrected in his own handwriting, and then given to Mr. Bliss, in September, 1881, in which statement he gave a different version of this indebtedness of Brady to him, and did not claim that it did grow out of any notes at all. He also omitted there a very significant passage, which appears in the testimony that he gave in court, and which gave the court the opportunity to rule his testimony in, namely, the statement that in that conversation with Brady in regard to the notes, Brady said he was only demanding from Walsh the same pro rata amount that be demanded from all the other contractors. Walsh had never thought of that at the time he made the statement in September, 1881. In that statement he says positively that he received those drafts from Brady, and my name does not appear any where in the

statement.

Mr. STEWART. That is already in evidence.

The WITNESS. Well, if it comes to that, I could pile up evidence showing the animus of this business. Letters have been sent me. I have one here now from New York that I had thought of reading to the committee, but I will not take the time. The whole question was as to whether I would aid him in compelling certain men to pay him money, and because I would not do that, and corroborate his evidence, he has pushed these proceedings against me. Only a year ago I received a process from a New York court, in which Mr. Walsh had made an affidavit setting forth that I knew of an indebtedness, which I could by no possibility have had knowledge of, existing on the part of Brady to him, Walsh. He says that I paid him $10,000 as the agent of Brady, which he knows to be utterly false; and that was the basis of the application in the civil suit pending before Judge Bartlett in New York against Mr. Brady, to have me brought as a witness to prove au indebtedness on the part of Brady to him.

Now I will leave the question of service, and pass to the question of indebtedness. The question is, did I receive any compensation! If I did not render any service whatever, of course the charge is baseless. If I rendered service, and did not receive any pay for it, that would not be an offense within the statute. Mr. Walsh alleges that I received onehalf of the proceeds of five drafts of $3,000 each, if my memory serves me right, and a note of $5,000, given by J. B. Price. Now I want to state to the committee precisely what relation I had to those drafts. As is well known, my contest for my seat in the Senate, the case known as the Kellogg Spofford case involving the question of my seat, was pending in April, May, June, and July, 1879. having originated in April, 1879, at the extra session of the Senate. We had taken a great deal of evidence. The witnesses arrived in Washington on the 4th of June;

they began to testify on the 5th of June, 1879, and the committee continued to take testimony during part of June. Congress adjourned on the 1st of July that year, and in the mean time the committee had taken, I suppose, 500 pages of testimony, which was being transcribed, and I was looking after it and making a summary of it, with the aid of my attorneys, Messrs. Shellabarger and Wilson, with the view of going to New Orleans and attending the session of the subcommittee that had been directed, by the Committee on Privileges and Elections, to go there and take testimony, commencing on the 17th of November, 1879, at the St. Charles Hotel. I was then living at Willard's, as I am now, and occupying the same rooms that I now occupyrooms 70 and 71. Mr. Walsh had been living on Fourth street, but had given up his house there, had sent his family to Fortress Monroe, and taken rooms at Willard's adjoining mine, his being rooms Nos. 72 and 73. His parlor opened into my parlor. Mr. Price was at that time in room 83. This, you will observe, was about the close of the fiscal year, and the contractors were all here looking after their contracts. Mr. Walsh had, it appears, just procured expedition-you may have heard of it in the testimony adduced before you-a very large expedition, as it turned out to be, growing out of what is termed the McDonough contract on the route from Santa Fé, New Mexico, to Prescott. He had had the service expedited and the pay increased, first, I think, from $18,000 to $36,000, then from $36,000 to $74,000, and then from $74,000 to $135,000. I am not sure, but I think that is a substantially correct statement. Mr. Price had, I bilieve, a route called the Albuquerque route, running in the vicinity of Mr. Walsh's, and of course they were friends and were together a great deal. Now I call attention to certain facts of which I have procured a memorandum from the hotel register. From that register it appears that Mr. Walsh came to Willard's Hotel and occupied room 72 and 73 on June 4th, 1879; left on the 12th of July; returned on Friday evening, July 18th; left July 21st; returned, and left July 23d; returned again October 20th; left October 29th; returned November 1st and occupied room 32, and left again November 5th. Mr. Price came to Willard's and occupied room 83 on June 30th, 1879, in the morning; left July 12th; returned July 15th, in the morning; left July 18th, after dinner; was there on different occasions during August and September, returned October 30th, and left November 5th. He occupied room 52 while he was there. He came here and occupied a room near Walsh's on October 30th. Walsh arrived November 1st, and they both left November 5th. I had left Washington the latter part of July. I think I was here some time during the summer, and then casually for a day or two looking after some matters connected with my case, and then I went West and South.

At the hotel we were often together and Walsh and Price were in and out of my room a great deal, having been, as I understood, old friends in Louisiana. Mr. Walsh had procured his expedition, and Price knew it, and Price himself was applying for expedition, and, as I understood it, they were working together, though I did not know the details of the matter. Mr. Walsh left the hotel on July 12th and went to Saint Louis. He returned on the evening of the 18th of July. Before Mr. Walsh went away he said to me, "If Mr. Price gives you any papers, keep them for me." Mr. Price came to me, as nearly as I can recollect, on the 18th of July, the very day that he left according to the hotel register, which would be Friday. Walsh had not returned; he returned that night. Price came to me and said, "Hand these papers to Mr. Walsh." I put the papers in my drawer. Mr. Walsh arrived on the evening train, and