charges that were pending against him and understood his plea in connection with them, is that true? Mr. BROWN. I think so. That is my recollection about it. I know that sentence had not been passed as yet. I know that. Mr. NESBITT. Then you did not return to the room and were not present when sentence was passed? Mr. BROWN. No, sir; I was not. Mr. NESBITT. Whether it was passed on that same day or on the next day makes no difference. You were not present when it was passed? Mr. BROWN. I absolutely was not present, and I only know it was passed on that day from information I got from the assistant and from Judge Baker himself. Mr. NESBITT. Judge Brown, the charges here pending are not the first charges that you have filed against Judge Baker, are they? Mr. BROWN. In the first place Mr. NESBIT (interposing). Please answer the question. me Mr. BROWN. Yes; I will answer your questions, if you will give Mr. NESBITT. I will ask you to answer it yes or no and then go on with your explanation. Mr. BROWN. I prefer to answer as I understand it. Mr. NESBITT. I believe I am entitled to a direct reply. Mr. DYER. The question is, Judge, if you preferred other charges previous to the charges under which this investigation is now being conducted? Mr. BROWN. I do not know whether you would call them cha rges I want to tell the facts about it. The first thing I did was to file a report. I would not consider those charges against Judge Baker. I filed a report of what had occurred in the Sawa case, to the end that Sawa might be released from jail, if he was illegally imprisoned. Later, at the request of the Assistant Attorney General, or one of the Assistant Attorneys General, I filed a report of the conditions that existed in this district. Mr. DYER. Mr. Brown, this committee is very anxious to hasten the inquiry, with due regard to the importance of it. I think you can answer the question of Judge Nesbit, and then explain, if you desire. Did you, previous to the charges filed, under which this inquiry is being made, file other charges, and if so, where and when? Mr. NESBITT. That is all I want to know. Mr. BROWN. I presume you might call them charged. I call them a report to the Attorney General. Mr. DYER. You did file some charges to the Department of Justice? Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir. Mr. DYER. When was that? Mr. NESBITT. That is all I wanted to know. Mr. DYER. That was some time previous to these charges? Mr. BROWN. I think that was about the 1st of January, 1923? Mr. BROWN. Well, I expect you would call them that. It was a report of conditions. You can call them anything you please. Mr. NESBITT. You used the following language: "In the performance of this unpleasant duty, I prefer the following charges against him, William E. Baker, judge of the district court.' Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir. Mr. HICKEY. What is the date of those charges? Mr. NESBITT. December 30, 1922. Mr. DYER. As I gather it, they are in effect the same thing. Mr. NESBITT. No. Mr. DYER. He may have modified them or changed them, but he first filed them with the Department of Justice. Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir; that is correct. Mr. DYER. The Department of Justice referred him to the Judiciary Committee of the House. The Judiciary Committee of the House had no authority to take them up, coming in that way. Then he filed his charges with the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Speaker then referred them to the Judiciary Committee for investigation. That, as I understand it, was the procedure. Mr. BROWN. That is correct. Mr. NESBITT. It was your understanding at that time, and you so presented it to the Department of Justice, did you not, that Judge Baker was seeking to undermine the organization of the District Attorney's office, and seeking to obtain your removal from office, the removal of Charles J. Schuck, the special assistant, and the removal of C. W. Grimes, isn't that true? Mr. BROWN. Yes; that is true, except that Mr. Schuck had at that time retired from the office. But it was my understanding that he had been undermining the whole office; yes, sir. Mr. DYER. Judge Nesbitt, we have an agreement, or at least a tentative agreement here, that we are going to consider certain matters to-day. I think you should confine your inquiry to those subjects. Mr. Brown has so far testified largely upon heresay. The committee is composed entirely of lawyers. We understand the value of such testimony and he will have to substantiate what he has stated here by competent evidence upon the question of the Sawa cases. I think we must ask you gentlemen to be fair with the committee and let us go ahead with these three matters which we proposed to take up to-day. Mr. NESBITT. If the committee please, I have gone on this branch of the case just about as far as I had intended to go. The introduction of this particular evidence was simply for the purpose of indicating to the committee the animus that lies behind the present charges. I have only one more question in that connection. Mr. DYER. That will not have much effect on the committee, Judge. The question is whether or not the charge which has been made pertaining to the Sawa case is true or not, whether or not the information was illegally changed and if it was changed, was it by order of the court, and was a citizen or an alien, or whoever it may be, illegally confined in jail. That is all there is to this charge. Mr. NESBITT. That is true, and the question of animus simply has its bearing on the credibility of the witnesses. Mr. DYER. It will not influence this committee, because what we are endeavoring to find out is whether or not this is the fact, and if so, how did it come about? Mr. NESBITT. That is far as I had intended to go with that subject. Mr. DYER. Do any gentlemen of the committee desire to question Mr. Brown? Mr. FOSTER. I should like to ask one question. Was the interlineation made on this information when you first saw it after the 18th of May? Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir; the interlineation did not appear on the information on the evening of the 19th. That was the last time I saw it, and at that time there was no interlineation on it. The next time I saw it, which was sometime after court adjourned, it was on there. Mr. FOSTER. On what date? You said "that next time I saw it." Mr. BROWN. It was some time in July.. Mr. FOSTER. The 19th refers to what month? Mr. BROWN. The 19th day of May. Mr. FOSTER. In other words, you testimony on that is that on the 19th of May, when you first saw it, the interlineation was not there? Mr. BROWN. Yes. Mr. FOSTER. The following July you saw it and it was there? Mr. FOSTER. From your personal knowledge, that is your testi mony. Mr. BROWN. Yes, sir. It saw it on the evening of the 19th, as late as 8 o'clock. Mr. FOSTER. That is all I wanted to ask. Mr. DYER. Call your next witness. Judge, you are excused. TESTIMONY OF HON. HOWARD D. MATTHEWS (The witness was duly sworn by the chairman.) Mr. DYER. State your name. Mr. MATTHEWS. Howard D. Matthews. Mr. SCHUCK. Mr. Matthews, you are at present an attorney located in the city of Wheeling, W. Va.? Mr. MATTHEWS. I am. Mr. SCHUCK. And a member of Mr. Handlon's firm there, are you? Mr. MATTHEWS. I am. Mr. SCHUCK. What were you previous to the time you became such attorney at the Wheeling bar? Mr. MATTHEWS. Assistant United States attorney for the northern West Virginia district. Mr. SCHUCK. And located here at Parkersburg? Mr. MATTHEWS. Yes, sir. Mr. SCHUCK. You remember the Sawa case that was tried up at Wheeling during the May term, 1922, in the Federal court held there? Mr. MATTHEWS. I do. Mr. SCHUCK. Were you assistant district attorney at that time? Mr. MATTHEWS. I was. Mr. SCHUCK. Were you one of them in charge of the trial of cases in open court at that time? Mr. MATTHEWS. I was. Mr. SCHUCK. Will you tell the committee here just what, if anything, you know about the Sawa matter the Mike Sawa, sr., case. Mr. MATTHEWS. I was appointed United States attorney, assistant United States attorney, and on the 1st day of May, 1922, assumed my duties at Wheeling, where court was in session. On about the 17th day of May a case was called against Mike Sawa, jr. I do not know whether the junior name appears on the information or not; I have not seen it since that day. I think he had an alias, Adolph Sawa. We found we had a young boy arrainged as a defendant and, as a result of questioning on the part of the court and the district attorneys's office, it was established to the satisfaction of both the court and the district attorney's office that this boy was probably merely a tool for his father. The result was that a capias was ordered forthwith. Whether it was upon the order of the court or upon the request of the United States attorney, sanctioned by the court, I can not say; at any rate, a capias forthwith was issued and the father, whose name was Mike Sawa, sr., was arrested and, if I remember correctly, was unable to give a bond and was committed to jail. Mr. SCHUCK. What day was that, please? Mr. MATTHEWS. The 17th day of May, 1922. Mr. SCHUCK. Was there an information or informations drawn that day with reference to the Mike Sawa, sr., case? Mr. MATTHEWS. As I recall, there were identical informations drawn against the father as had already been prepared and filed against the son, and the informations against the father, two of them (their numbers were 6454, which alleged the violation of section 25 of the national prohibition act, and 6455, which alleged the violation of section 3, Title II, of the national prohibition act), were filed on the 17th day of May, 1922. Mr. SCHUCK. Now, go on, Mr. Matthews, and tell what happened after that. Mr. MATTHEWs. On the 19th of May, 1922, I was representing, together with Mr. Harry Hiteshew, who was a practicing attorney at that time in the city of Parkersburg-we were representing two defendants by the name of Howell and Cooper, in the State court here at Parkersburg, which necessitated my leaving the city of Wheeling on the night of the 18th. The 19th was Friday and the court closed on Saturday the 20th. Mr. SCHUCK. That is, you mean the Federal court? Mr. MATTHEWs. The Federal court closed at Wheeling on May 19, 1922. The result is I left Wheeling on the night of the 18th of May, 1922, which was Thursday night, on the 8.50 train, arriving here some time after midnight. In the afternoon, the exact hour I can not say, Mike Sawa, sr., was arraigned in open court. Mr. SCHUCK. What day was that? Mr. MATTHEWS. The 17th of May, 1922, on Thursday. The man was unintelligible; we could not make out his explanations and, as I recall, there were attorneys either appointed or requested to act for the purpose of inquiring of the defendant and informing him of the nature of the charges against him. Who they were I do not know; I do not have a distinct recollection of that. But, at any rate, Mike Sawa, sr., was brought back into court some time that afternoon by the attorneys, if there were attorneys appointed, who signified to the satisfaction of the court that Mike Sawa desired to plead guilty and he did plead guilty. I recall the court questioning Mike Sawa, sr., at length concerning the matter, and whether or not Mike Sawa was able to understand the questions of the court I can not say. Mr. SCHUCK. What day was he sentenced, if you recall? Mr. MATTHEWS. He was sentenced in my presence on the 18th day of May, 1922, and I recall it distinctly. Mr. Schuck, you sat directly opposite me at the counsel table; the court room was full and, if my memory serves me correstly, when the sentence was pronounced of four months in the Ohio County jail, on information No. 6454, you made a remark across the counsel table, in substance, "He can not do that"; and I said, "No, Charlie, I do not think he can, either." I was not as familiar with the statute at that time as I have become since, as I had just been appointed on the 1st of May of that year; but I recall the sentence. Mike Sawa was committed to the custody of the marshal; some other formal matters were disposed of and court adjourned. I made a report to the United States attorney's office, to the Hon. T. A. Brown, as had been my instructions, and as I did constantly since that time. I was in charge of the docket for the two years that I was in office and, at the close of every day's business, it was my custom and, at the request of the United States attorney, to make a report to him of everything done during the day. I remember going to his office in a hurry-I was anxious to get away-and telling him of the transactions of the day, among which was that of the sentence of Mike Sawa, sr., and of his statement to me, which he has made here on this witness stand this morning, that "He could not sentence him to jail on that charge." I left there at 8.50 that night and come down here and tried the Cooper and Howell cases on the 19th and 20th day of May, 1922. Mr. SCHUCK. The 19th and 20th? Mr. MATTHEWS. Yes, sir. I did not return to Wheeling. That is all I know about the Sawa matter. Mr. SCHUCK. Mr. Matthews, I am handing you two photostatic copies, one marked "6454" on the back, and the one marked "6455, United States v. Mike Sawa, sr.," marked on both of them, and ask you whether they are true copies of the informations concerning the Mike Sawa, sr., cases that were pending at the Wheeling, May term, 1922? Mr. CONIFF. We have admitted they are, Mr. Schuck. Mr. SCHUCK. Very well, then; I will ask you, Mr. Matthews, to look at the photostatic copy of 6454 and ask you whether the interlineation "and did unlawfully manufacture 2 gallons of moonshine whisky," written in by pen-whether that was in that information at the time sentence was passed by Judge Baker on Mike Sawa, sr.? Mr. MATTHEWS. It was not. Mr. SCHUCK. That is the last I understand you know of the Sawa case? Mr. MATTHEWS. That is correct. Mr. SCHUCK. Cross-examine. Mr. NESBITT. As I understand, you were in court twice on the Sawa case; once on the afternoon of the 17th and the next time on the afternoon of the 18th? Mr. MATTHEWs. I was in court all the time, Judge Nesbitt; I was in court on those two days; yes, sir. Mr. NESBITT. I say those were the two occasions and only occasions. 29045-25-PT 1- 4 |