354 



FANCIEES' JOUENAL AND POULTEY EXCHANGE. 



to whom he introduced me as Mr. Willis. Before the Con- 

 vention assembled, Mr. Halsted asked me if I could furnish 

 him a table to write upon, at the same time saying that Mr. 

 Estes, editor of Poultry Bulletin, was quite old and not quick 

 enough to write up the Convention, and desired him (Hal- 

 sted) to do so for the Bulletin; and I will state j ust here that 

 later in the proceedings of the Convention, when it became 

 apparent for what purpose Mr. Halsted desired to take the 

 minutes of the Convention, I mentioned to Mr. Estes the 

 compliment paid him by Mr. Halsted on his age and ina- 

 bility to write up the Convention, and his (Estes 1 ) desire to 

 have him (Halsted) write up the Convention for the Bulletin, 

 in answer to which Mr. Estes said that he had made no such 

 request of Mr. Halsted ; that he considered himself com- 

 petent to attend to his own business, and that he came to 

 the Convention for that purpose. I furnished Mr. Halsted 

 a table, which was placed, at his request, in a remote and 

 out-of-the-way place in the room, and upon the assembling 

 of the Convention both Mr. Halsted and the said Mr. Willis 

 seated themselves at the table, and were busily engaged in 

 writing. One of the first things the Convention did was to 

 adopt, by a unanimous vote, a resolution that the standard 

 which the Convention should agree upon should be the sole 

 and exclusive property of the American Poultry Association, 

 and that no one would be allowed to take the minutes of the 

 Convention except the regular Secretaries. 



Notwithstanding the unanimous adoption of the above 

 resolution, Mr. Halsted and the said Willis continued to 

 write. My attention was called to this fact, and upon 

 giving the matter a little attention I became convinced that 

 the said Willis was a stenographer, and so reported to some 

 of the members of the Convention. A very close watch 

 was kept upon those two gentlemen from that time until the 

 close of the session, and many members of the Convention 

 reluctantly came to the conclusion that while Mr. Halsted 

 ostensibly came as a delegate from the New York State 

 Poultry Society to assist in making a new standard, his real 

 purpose was to surreptitiously obtain the minutes of the 

 Convention, procure a copyright of the standard, and issue 

 the same as his personal property. At the opening of the 

 next session of the Convention, the President called the 

 attention of the delegates to the resolution forbidding any 

 one except the Secretaries taking minutes, and said, as pre- 

 siding officer, he should be obliged to enforce the rules, and 

 if taking minutes by other persons than the Secretaries was 

 persisted in, it would be his duty to expel such persons. 



As might have been expected, after the forcible warning 

 of the President, the Convention was not again annoyed by 

 Mr. Halsted, or his stenographer, taking minutes of the 

 proceedings. During the same afternoon Mr. Halsted was 

 suddenly called from the deliberations of the Convention, 

 as he said, by a telegram from home advising him of sick- 

 ness in his family ; and the man whom Mr. Halsted intro- 

 duced as Mr. Willis no longer found the sessions of the 

 Convention of any interest, and paid them no attention. 



Mr. Halsted and his stenographer did not, however, take 

 the same train home, for reasons that will be obvious to any 

 reader. 



After the sessions of the Convention had ceased to be 

 interesting to the stenographer, and after Mr. Halsted had 

 left the city, a telegram was delivered to the Convention 

 addressed "Albert C. Cochrane, Stenographer to the Poultry 

 Convention." (I quote the address from memory, and the 

 name may not be strictly correct.) Mr. Cochrane was called 



for in the Convention, but no one responded ; and the Con- 

 vention, not having employed a stenographer, it was a 

 mystery who Mr. Cochrane was. It was suggested that 

 Mr. Cochrane was stenographer to Mr. Halsted instead of 

 the Poultry Convention, and that perhaps Mr. Cochrane 

 and the person whom Mr. Halsted introduced as Mr. Willis, 

 a delegate from New York State Poultry Society, were one 

 and the same person; and a gentleman connected with the 

 Convention took the telegram to the Bloomer Hotel, where 

 the so-called Mr. Willis was stopping, and asked the clerk 

 to hand it to the said Willis, which was done in the presence 

 of the gentlemen who asked the clerk to do it. The result 

 was, the man whom Mr. Halsted introduced as Mr. Willis, 

 a delegate from New York State Poultry Society, opened 

 the telegram which was addressed to "Albert E. Cochrane, 

 Stenographer to the Poultry Convention," read it, and did 

 not again visit the Convention, but unceremoniously took 

 the first train for New York or somewhere else. Many per- 

 sons have been hung upon circumstantial evidence less direct 

 and connecting than this 5 but the committee, after con- 

 sidering the matter, came to the conclusion that Mr. Halsted 

 had endeavored to perpetrate a fraud upon the Convention, 

 and a committee was appointed to investigate the ease more 

 fully, and report at the meeting of the Executive Committee 

 appointed to take place at Boston, in February. 



Upon the assembling of the Executive Committee at Bos- 

 ton, the said Committee of Investigation made a report, 

 which, together with other evidence in the possession of the 

 Executive Committee, induced the writer of this article to 

 offer a resolution of expulsion, which was unanimously 

 adopted. A part of the evidence before the Committee was 

 that a member of the Executive Committee, who was pres- 

 ent at Buffalo and had taken a great interest in maintaining 

 the integrity of the American Poultry Association, had been 

 to New York a few days prior to the Boston meeting of the 

 Executive Committee, and while in New York inquired for 

 Albert E. Cochrane, a stenographer, and found a party who 

 knew Mr. Cochrane, and had known him for years, and this 

 person did point out to the said member of the Executive 

 Committee as Albert E. Cochrane the same person whom- Mr. 

 Halsted introduced as George B. Willis, a delegate to the con- 

 vention from the New York State Poultry Society. Does 

 the candid reader think that the charge that Mr. Halsted 

 was expelled on was a trumped-up charge ? Does any fair- 

 minded man who is acquainted with the gentlemen compos- 

 ing the Executive Committee of the American Poultry 

 Association, think they would try a member on a trumped- 

 up charge, or expel him without good and sufficient reason? 



Mr. Halsted, in his communication in No. 17, Fanciers' 

 Journal, objects to the tribunal as incompetent. I may be 

 permitted to say that in my opinion he who objects to such 

 a jury, and would endeavor to shield himself by such frivo- 

 lous technicalities as are contained in said communication, 

 must have a weak case indeed. The claim made by Mr. 

 Halsted that the recourse of the American Poultry Associa- 

 tion was upon the New York State Poultry Society, whose 

 delegate he was, for the evil doings of Mr. Halsted, is too 

 absurd to think of for a moment ; and the advancement of 

 such an argument is, and will be, considered as an admission 

 on the part of Mr. Halsted of the truth of the charge and 

 an endeavor to shirk the responsibility. Mr. Halsted's 

 assertion that he was convicted upon the false testimony of 

 Churchman and Sweet will demand from me only sufficient 

 attention to say that such arguments are unbecoming a gen- 



\ 



