Twenty-fourth. That thereafter and on or about March 20, 1915, said Alvarado, as such governor, made and issued a decree, a true and correct English translation of which is hereto annexed, marked "Exhibit F," and made a part hereof, whereby he declares null and void all said checks drawn by said regulating committee upon the general State treasury of the State of Yucatan, issued under said decree of February 26, 1915, made and issued by said Argumedo as governor of said State, a true and correct translation into English of which is hereto annexed, marked "Exhibit D," and made a part hereof. That said checks delivered to this defendant in the sum of 3,500,000 pesos in exchange for said $2,000 Mexican gold, said $19,000 draft, and said letter of credit, Exhibit A, as aforesaid, were a paid of said issue so declared null and void. On information and belief, that thereafter and on or about March 25, 1915, the said Alvarado, as governor of said State of Yucatan, made and issued a further decree, a true and correct English translation of which is hereto annexed, marked “Exhibit G," and made a part hereof, requiring the holders of all checks of said issue authorized by said decree of February 26, 1915 (Exhibit D), bearing the serial numbers C and D, including all said checks for 3,500,000 pesos delivered to this defendant on March 2, 1915, to deliver the same to the general State treasury of the State of Yucatan within 30 days so that they might be destroyed, and declaring that any and all persons after April 1, 1915, having in their possession or placing in circulation said checks, or any of them, would be considered as counterfeiters and would be subject to the penalties for counterfeiting. On information and belief, that the penalty for counterfeiting in the State of Yucatan was, on March 25, 1915, and ever since has been death. That this defendant, prior to March 20, 1915, was able to dispose of in payment for sisal purchased from said regulating committee and otherwise but 201,020 pesos out of said 3,500,000 pesos received by him from the plaintiff for said $2,000 Mexican gold, said draft for $19,000 United States currency, and said letter of credit, Exhibit A, and that the balance of said pesos, by virtue of said decrees Exhibits F and G are, and since March 20, 1915, have been worthless. Twenty-fifth. That said checks of said regulating committee upon the general State treasury of the State of Yucatan for 3,550,000 pesos by said decrees of said Alvarado, as governor of the State of Yucatan, Exhibits F and G hereto, having been declared null and void and counterfeit, this defendant, except to the extent that he has disposed of said checks as aforesaid, has received no consideration for the delivery of said letter of credit, Exhibit A, said $2,000 Mexican gold, said draft for $19,000 United States currency, and for the $180,000 United States currency, paid to said Evia and the said Ancona Camera, as aforesaid, and by reason of said decrees of said Alvarado, said governor of the State of Yucatan, and any and all consideration, except as aforesaid, for the delivery of said $2,000 Mexican gold, said draft for $19,000 United States currency, and said letter of credit, Exhibit A, and for the making of said payment of $180,000 United States currency, by the act of the plaintiff herein, has wholly failed and been destroyed, all to the damage of this defendant in the sum of $171,662 United States currency. Twenty-sixth. That this defendant will produce upon the trial of this action checks for 3.348,980 pesos drawn by said regulating committee upon the general State treasury of the State of Yucatan and delivered by the plaintiff to this defendant at the time of the delivery of said letter of credit, Exhibit A, which said checks are valueless. That is subscribed and sworn to, and the affidavit is dated February 8, 1916. The CHAIRMAN. Proceed now with your witness, or do you wish to do something else? Mr. MAYER. It is manifest that until you hear the complaint to which this answer is made, the committee will not have the issue intelligently before them. You, as a lawyer, Mr. Chairman, and Senator Gronna as a citizen of varied experience, and Senator Wadsworth, know that an answer made by a defendant in a law suit does not help to dispose of the issue until you have the complaint made by the plaintiff, and we are going into an issue which will necessitate our bringing in the complaint in this suit to which reference was made. The CHAIRMAN. I infer so. Do you wish to offer that complaint? Mr. MAYER. Yes, sir; we will have to send for it. The CHAIRMAN. Let it be understood that it is offered now, and a copy to be furnished. The logical place for it to go in, I should say, is right in connection with this answer, and if you wish to offer it we will permit you to do so at this time. Mr. MAYER. Now, Mr. Chairman, before we call a witness, on February 19-I have the transcript in my hand-there was some discussion about the Continental & Commercial National Bank presenting a statement of the account of the International Harvester Co. So that I may not be inaccurate in any statement that I make, I want to read from the transcript. I will not read it all. The CHAIRMAN That is, Senator Ransdell I wonder if there is any way we could get from the bank or from the International Harvester Co. a statement of exactly what that is, so the subcommittee would be posted. Then there was discussion running along several pages in which Mr. Spencer and the chairman and Mr. Fisher participated, and also myself Mr. SPENCER. What I would like to see, Mr. Chairman, is the situation of that account on the day and at the time we said the Harvester Co. threatened the Continental & Commercial National Bank. Now, we would like to see progress of that account since, and see whether or not that threat was in substance carried out. The CHAIRMAN. It would certainly post the committee very much better if we knew the amount at that date and at the present time. Mr. FISHER. But let us go further back than that. The statement Mr. Spencer had suggested going back to November Mr. FISHER. But let us go further back than that. The statement, as you know, to which the controversy relates really is not the statement of Dr. Rendon, because he stated he knew it only by hearsay. It was the statement made on authority of the counsel of the bank and therefore supposed to be backed by personal knowledgeThen there is further comment Mr. FISHER. I suggest, if the committee please, that if we are to get any significance as to the account of this institution with this bank it should cover a period considerably longer than that. * * * I would suggest two or three years so as to show-at convenient periods. The committee thereupon, through its secretary, requested the bank to make up the statement, and I wish to read a letter to the Committee which I am requested to read, addressed to Mr. Levy Mayer, care of the Ritz Carlton Hotel, New York City, N. Y. CONTINENTAL & COMMERCIAL NATIONAL BANK OF CHICAGO, Mr. LEVY MAYER, DEAR SIR: As you are aware, we have been requested by the United States Senate subcommittee which is conducting the hearing on the sisal matter to submit to the committee a statement of the account of the International Harvester Co. with the Continental & Commercial National Bank. We inclose to you, as counsel for the bank, the statement called for. It is the invariable rule of this bank to treat all accounts of its customers as strictly confidential, but, of course, we hold ourselves subject to the general rules of law providing for the introduction of evidence under proper conditions, and if, in your judgment, the subcommittee of the Senate has the right to require the production of this account, or if the International Harvester Co. consents to its production, you are at liberty to present it to the committee. But you will, of course, so far as in your power, observe our general rule above stated, that this account, like all others, should be disclosed only by demand of the proper authority, or by the consent of the depositor. Yours, very truly, ARTHUR REYNOLDS, Vice President. I would like to ask of the counsel for the International Harvester Co. whether he consents to the introduction of that statement? Mr. FISHER. I would be very glad to look at the statement and consult with my people. So far as I am concerned, I think it is perfectly proper to go in, notwithstanding the fact that the evidence here is purely voluntary and not under oath, and the committee has issued no subpoenas. Mr. MAYER. Now, Mr. Chairman, the bank submits itself to the jurisdiction of this committee, and I now, in my capacity as general counsel for the bank, say to the committee that I have that statement here, verified by an officer of the bank, and going back three years, to January 1, 1913. As I read the transcript of this testimony, in effect Mr. Fisher has consented to the introduetion of this statement, because when Mr. Spencer suggested that we go back to November, Mr. Fisher suggested that we go back three years. The bank does not wish to appear as in any way obstructing the investigation of this committee, and if this committee will issue a subpoena duces tecum to the bank, I, as its counsel, will accept service of that subpoena and will present the statement. Mr. SPENCER. Is not a request just as good as a subpena? Mr. MAYER. The letter of the bank states its practice, and, in my opinion, states the law. At any rate, it states its practice. The CHAIRMAN. Did I not understand Mr. Fisher to say that he would like to see the statement, but that he had no objection to its going in? If I understood him correctly, that is what he said. Mr. MAYER. If that is the agreement, I will show him the state ment. The CHAIRMAN. That is what I understood him to say. Mr. FISHER. I know nothing about the banking transactions of these institutions, either of the Commercial Bank or of the International Harvester Co. I am not counsel for either, and have not been. I have said that if you will let me have this statement, so that I may examine it and consult with somebody representing the company, I do not think there will be any difficulty about it. So far as my personal views as a lawyer are concerned, and as counsel in the case, I think it ought to go in. The CHAIRMAN. I thought that you were counsel for the International Harvester Co. Mr. FISHER. I am, but I am only representing them in this matter. I am not their general counsel. The CHAIRMAN. Suppose you let Mr. Fisher see it, and see if we can not agree to let it go into the record. I understand that if we should exert our rights, we could have this brought here under proper legal process, but we have been going on so informally so far, and perhaps we can get through without doing that. Mr. FISHER. Do you want me to stop and examine this at this time? What I would prefer to do would be to have an opportunity to examine the document and then consult with some one representing the harvester company. The CHAIRMAN. I do not suppose we ought to stop the case, but that Mr. Mayer can go ahead. Mr. MAYER. Surely, but I have been particularly desirous that the committee should know accurately the position of the bank. 28201-VOL 1-16-33 The CHAIRMAN. I think it is very important that we have this testimony, and I sincerely hope there will be no objection to it going in. If there is, it may be necessary for us to resort to our legal powers. Mr. FISHER. I do not think we need discuss those phases of it at present. The CHAIRMAN. No. Mr. FISHER. I should think not. The CHAIRMAN. Then we will proceed with the witness, unless Mr. Mayer has something else. Mr. Spencer, are you ready to proceed? Mr. MAYER. I would like to examine this witness, because, in the division of the labor, I have talked to some of the witnesses and Mr. Spencer has talked to others. The CHAIRMAN. Very well, proceed, Mr. Mayer. STATEMENT OF FELIPE G. CANTON, OF YUCATAN. Mr. MAYER. What is your full name? Mr. CANTON. Felipe G. Canton. Mr. MAYER. How old are you? Mr. CANTON. Forty-eight years old. Mr. MAYER. Are you a Yucatan sisal farmer? Mr. CANTON. Yes. Mr. MAYER. Have you ever lived in the United States? Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. And during what years did you live in this country? Mr. CANTON. Well, I was living for about 12 years here. I lived here up to 1902. Mr. MAYER. That is, from about 1890 to 1902? Mr. CANTON. Yes. Mr. MAYER. Where did you live-in what city? Mr. CANTON. New York. Mr. MAYER. Were you engaged in business there? Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. In what line of business? Mr. CANTON. Regular commission business. Mr. MAYER. Regular commission business? Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. Where were you born? Mr. CANTON. In Yucatan. Mr. MAYER. And you lived in Yucatan from the time of until 1890, or thereabouts? Mr. CANTON. Yes. Mr. MAYER. And you moved to New York and lived there until about 1902? Mr. CANTON. 1902; yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. And then returned to Yucatan? Mr. CANTON. And then returned to Yucatan; yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. And have been living there continuously since? Mr. CANTON. Continuously. Mr. MAYER. Are you a man of family? Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. Do you live in Progreso or Merida, or do you live on your plantation? Mr. CANTON. On the plantation most of the time. Mr. MAYER. When were you last in Yucatan? Mr. CANTON. I left Yucatan about two weeks ago. Mr. MAYER. You left Yucatan for the purpose of coming before this committee as a witness? Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. Your business is exclusively that of growing sisal hemp? Mr. CANTON. Growing sisal; yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. That is practically the entire industry of Yucatan? Mr. CANTON. That is it entirely. Mr. MAYER. And you are thoroughly familiar with it? Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. Do you own a substantial plantation? Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. About how big is your plantation? Mr. CANTON. It is of an average size of about 40,000 macates. Mr. CANTON. Yes. Mr. MAYER. That would make about 4,000 acres? Mr. CANTON. Yes. Mr. MAYER. Is the 4,000 acres entirely under cultivation ? Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. And growing only sisal? Mr. CANTON. Growing sisal. Mr. MAYER. About how far is your plantation from Merida? Mr. MAYER. Your sisal is shipped from Merida to Progreso? Mr. CANTON. To Progreso; yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. Now, from 1902, when you went back to Yucatan, up to the present time, you are completely conversant with the whole sisal situation? Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. Do you remember the time when the International Harvester Co. was formed? Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. That was in 1902 and 1903 ? Mr. CANTON. It was about the time when I went to Yucatan. Mr. MAYER. Yes. Not here-sell a year. Mr. CANTON. I sell about 4,500. Mr. CANTON. Yes; or 5,000. Mr. MAYER. You were present the other night when a number of Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir; I was one of the parties who formed the prices, or arranged the prices. Mr. MAYER. You heard the testimony of Mr. Solis? Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir. Mr. MAYER. You know the figures that he testified to as to the cost of production? Mr. MAYER. From your own actual knowledge and experience, are Mr. CANTON. Yes, sir; I think they are right. those figures correct? |