Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Oh, several thousand dollars ought to cover it. I can not tell how much, but I know it is nothing like-well, it would be a poor guess, but nothing like $20,000.

Mr. FERRIS. Was Commodore Mulhall up there during that time? Mr. LITTLEFIELD. No; the commodore was not there.

Mr. FERRIS. Marshall Cushing was?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes; Marshall Cushing was part of the time. Mr. FERRIS. Would it have been possible for him to have collected large sums of money and used it in making your campaign without your knowledge?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. He did not collect that.

Mr. FERRIS. From outside sources, or otherwise?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Of course you understand I can not swear to the outside, but from my knowledge Mr. Cushing never paid a postage stamp in the campaign; he was not under any expense. Of course, he may have written some letters and paid postage on them; but he did not do anything except come up there at the expense of the association and I think his expenses at that time might have been paid by them; but he never contributed a cent, so far as I remember, to the expenses of the campaign.

Mr. FERRIS. But later on, in connection with the general election caucus, outside parties did contribute?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes; that is right. I do not think he contributed personally, though.

Mr. FERRIS. Also he raised some money?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes; sure he did.

Mr. FERRIS. During the month of August and for the 11 days in September Fred W. Wight in his deposition gives the expense for the campaign as $20,600.

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. So I understand.

Mr. FERRIS. And whatever your nominating expenses were, and whatever money was expended in the July preceding, would be in addition to this $20,661?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. It would be in addition to that; unless it was included, so far as it would be included, in that $3,000 he turned over

to me.

Mr. FERRIS. What are the facts about that?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. The facts are that approximately within perhaps a few hundred or a thousand dollars, it covered my disburse

ments.

Mr. FERRIS. Did he turn over to you $3,000 out of the $20,000?
Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes.

Mr. FERRIS. The assumption was that that was to cover your convention expenses-nominating expenses?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes.

Mr. FERRIS. And your expenses incurred prior to that?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Preceding and prior to the time the contributions came in.

Mr. FERRIS. It was to cover expenses in July prior to the time the Fred Wight committee took hold, or to cover both campaign expenses and primary?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. My understanding is it was to cover the disbursements I had made in connection with the campaign.

Mr. FERRIS. Both primary and otherwise?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes; and that is included in the $20,000.

Mr. FERRIS. But you do not know whether he got moneys, so far as your personal acquaintance is concerned, from members of the National Association of Manufacturers or not?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I never knew who many of them were.

Mr. FERRIS. You never knew who many of them were?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes.

Mr. FERRIS. You have not had occasion to look very carefully and check it up?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. No.

Mr. RUSSELL. I believe you made some statement about this, but I am not certain. Mulhall swears Cushing told him he brought direct from the National Association of Manufacturers $7,000.

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes.

Mr. RUSSELL. I forget whether you have made any statement about that.

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. When I saw Cushing in my office about two weeks ago, I had not seen the statement of Mr. Mulhall's, and I never discussed it with Cushing. I do not understand Cushing carried down any money.

Mr. RUSSELL. He may have done so?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Of course, I can not tell anything about that. Mr. RUSSELL. But you know Mr. Mulhall stated that in his testimony.

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes; but when I talked to Mr. Cushing about this, I had not seen Mr. Mulhall's statement and I could not ask him anything about it.

Mr. RUSSELL. You do not undertake to dispute that now?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. No; I could not undertake to state that.

Mr. RUSSELL. This man Charles Harriman-was he one of your managers?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. No; Charles Harriman I do not know in the sense of being acquainted with him. I knew there was a Charles Harriman and I did not know what he was politically, and I did not have anything to do with Charles Harriman, directly or indirectly. Mr. RUSSELL. I believe Mulhall said he had some connection with this clubroom.

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. So I understand.

Mr. RUSSELL. And that he was a preacher.

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I do not know as I know Charles Harriman well enough to give a biographical sketch. The first I heard of Charles Harriman was he was perambulating across the country a la Pedestrian Weston. [Laughter.]

Mr. RUSSELL. Has he not come back?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Oh, yes; I understand he is making speeches on the street corners.

Mr. RUSSELL. You do not know anything about his getting a horse and cart from the National Association of Manufacturers?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I have heard about it and seen it referred to here. I heard about it, but I never had anything to do with Mr. Harriman, directly or indirectly. The horse business, by the way. was Mulhall's scheme and attended to by him.

Mr. RUSSELL. If he was employed to manage your headquarters or assist your campaign in any way, you do not know anything about it and had no connection with it?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I may have known he was connected with what they call this independent league, which was the club Mr. Mulhall was talking about, but I never had anything to do with Mr. Harriman and I do not know anything about the details.

Mr. RUSSELL. If he was employed it was by somebody else?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I had absolutely nothing to do with it, either directly or indirectly.

Mr. RUSSELL. You did not know anything about the horse trade? Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Absolutely nothing.

Mr. STAFFORD. How active was the American Federation of Labor in the preconvention fight?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Mr. Gompers was down there and he made a speech at a big mass meeting, and I understand he attended various meetings of the organization, which were private. Of course I do not know what took place in those. Whenever he got around these clubs, where there was quite a section of laboring men, so far as I could see any indications on the surface, the indications were they were operating against me in the preconvention fight. It ought to be stated, I suppose, in order to be perfectly fair, that the large bulk, in my judgment, of the men that would be in Mr. Gompers's organization would be men that would naturally be for him. I have no personal knowledge about it so as to state about that, but that is my understanding of it. So far as my personal knowledge goes, in the vicinity where I lived that would be true. They would not, of course, be much of a factor in the Republican caucus, except sometimes they might be dragged in, perhaps, to help out. It would be impossible for me to tell just exactly how large a factor. All I can say is in the preconvention fight, so far as there were any indications of activity along that line, the indications were the activities were against me; but just exactly to what extent-I do not think it amounted to a very great deal, but it was a sort of general atmosphere they undertook to create.

Mr. STAFFORD. From your prior statement, I do not understand the men were active on election days?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Oh, yes. I do not think Mr. Gompers had any what I would call representatives or what I would call henchmen in the preconvention fight.

I have just a word here to say about the trip to New York.

Mr. CLINE. Let me ask you a question before you get on that, if you please. I just want to ask you one or two questions about the matter you testified to here in your earlier statement.

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes.

Mr. CLINE. Do you remember when the Grosvenor bill was introduced?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. You mean as to the date?

Mr. CLINE. Yes.

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. No; I can not give you the date.

Mr. CLINE. Can you give me the year?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes; I think it was in 1901. It was the bill upon which my minority views were predicated.

4858-VOL 4-13- -34

Mr. CLINE. How long did you have that bill in your subcommittee?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I do not think the bill was in my subcommittee at all. I think that bill was taken up in the whole committee and thrashed out, and the committee finally voted to report it.

Mr. CLINE. What bill did you have referred to your subcommittee of a like character?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. After that. Of course, I can not state, Judge, without having the records before me.

Mr. CLINE. I am just asking you to approximate it.

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I had all the bills, I think, in connection with this kind of bill, that were pending before the Judiciary Committee, such as the anti-injunction bill and the contempt bill; that is, the bill which proposed to have contempts tried before a jury instead of by the judge before whom they had been committed. That is the substance of the bill. They subsequently developed into what is known as the Pearre bill.

Mr. CLINE. Did you have the Pearre bill?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes.

Mr. CLINE. And you got acquainted with Mr. Cushing in 1904 or 1905, as I understand?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes.

Mr. CLINE. That was before this bill was assigned to your subcommittee?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Well, I should rather think that by that time the course had been adopted of assigning to my committee such bills, but I can not state definitely about that.

Mr. CLINE. Did Mr. Cushing know of your labor on the subcommittee?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Well, I think he must have. I think everybody did.

Mr. CLINE. Did you consult with him about it? Do you know whether you did or not?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. In what particular do you mean?

Mr. CLINE. I do not mean consulted, but did you acquaint him with the action of the subcommittee on this character of bill?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. No; I never bothered with Cushing to that extent. I handled the subcommittee myself.

Mr. CLINE. I mean from time to time did you talk over the course of that character of legislation?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I have no definite recollection of talking over the course of that character of legislation with him, but I think it is fairly probable that Cushing discussed the status and attitude of those bills with me.

Mr. CLINE. Did you know whether Mr. Cushing knew the course you were pursuing in the subcommittee with those bills?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I do not think there is any doubt about it. If he did not he was ignorant of what everybody else around here must have known. I do not think there was any man that was a Member of Congress but knew in a general way. I do not have any question but what Mr. Cushing knew. I think any man who took any interest, either the Federation or the people opposing it, must have known just what my attitude was.

Mr. CLINE. I want to ask your opinion on an abstract proposition: Do you think it is within the province of a subcommittee, appointed to consider legislation or bills that have been referred to it by a committee regularly appointed by the House, and the subcommittee that is expected to consider those bills and report them back to the full committee, to be disposed of as that committee sees fit-do you think it is within the province, rightfully, of the subcommittee to pigeonhole a bill of that character or any other character?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes, I do; if I had not I should not have pigeonholed them. I think those methods are adopted practically every day in the year in any legislative body I know anything about.

Mr. CLINE. You do not dream, Mr. Littlefield, that it is one of the anticipated provinces of a subcommittee to take legislation and pigeonhole it?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I do not know how much it is anticipated, but it must be a matter of common knowledge that that is the ordinary and usual form of legislative procedure. Anybody that has been here during the last 10 or 15 years must have been thoroughly advised about that; and to be perfectly frank (of course I appreciate the suggestion), I never heard anybody criticize the ethics of it.

Mr. CLINE. I was anxious to know what your opinion was, personally.

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I am not intimating it is not proper to criticize it. Of course, you must not understand me that way.

Mr. CLINE. I understand; but I wanted to know if you thought a subcommittee, to which was referred important legislation, important bills, the subject of legislation, had as a matter of right and as an arm of the committee to consider those bills, appointed with the express view of examining the questions involved and reporting it back to the full committee for determination, just simply, by the mere force of the fact that it had numbers enough, to suppress the bill and prevent its coming back to the committee.

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. It was not within the ultimate power of the subcommittee to suppress. It was within the power of the Judiciary Committee, at any moment, to require a report. Every man on this Judiciary Committee knew just exactly what my attitude was. There was no concealment about it. Whether it was precisely ethical or not, of course, I am not going to undertake to discuss in detail, but there was no misunderstanding about it. It was within the power of this Judiciary Committee, at any time, to discharge the subcommittee from their consideration of this bill. Of course they did not do it. Mr. CLINE. I am asking for the facts. You know committees don't do that.

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. I know they don't do that? I have submitted several and divers motions to secure it for the express purpose of discharging other committees which were considering subjects. I know I was responsible for the action of the subcommittee, and everybody on that committee knew I was ready to take the responsibility, and did take it.

Mr. CLINE. You took the responsibility for killing the bill?

Mr. LITTLEFIELD. Yes; I did, and they were all perfectly willing for me to take it; I can tell you that, Judge; and all the other 17 of the committee were willing for me to take it. They knew I was full willing, and they were mighty glad to have me take the responsibility.