596 INVESTIGATION OF THE FUR-SEAL INDUSTRY OF ALASKA. 



Mr. McGuire. I want the dignity of the committee sustained, but 

 I am frank to say that I assume that I differ very materially 



Mr. Elliott (interrupting). You haven't got a fragment of proof 

 of that. 



Mr. McGuire (continuing). With the committee on some things 

 the committee has done. 



Mr. Stephens. You have your remedy. Appeal to the House. I 

 do not care, as one member of the committee, to be criticized by you. 

 I have done what I thought was right, and have no apologies to make. 



Mr. McGuire. I want to keen entirely within the rules, and I do 

 not see how I am going to examine this witness where there is a con- 

 tention as to the legality of the questions asked if a majority of the 

 committee makes a ruling. 



Mr. Watkins. If we want to be technical, we could raise the ob- 

 jection that it is a leading question, calls for the opinion of the wit- 

 ness, and was put in such a manner as to bring about a personal con- 

 troversy and feeling which is unnecessary. 



Mr. Stephens. And suggested the answer that was desired. 



Mr. McGuire. It was a direct question. I asked if that state- 

 ment was true or false. That is a direct question. 



The Chairman. Let me make a suggestion: For instance, the wit- 

 ness made a statement about some paragraphs on page 263 of hear- 

 ing No. 1. Let us see whether we can not overcome this by you 

 framing your questions in this way: "Mr. Lembkey, what have you 

 to say about paragraph 2 on page 263 ?" Then let the witness make 

 his own statement. 



Mr. Watkins. That would not be leading and would not call for 

 the opinion of the witness, and it would not bring the committee 

 in disrepute by using a character of language which is unparlia- 

 mentary. 



Mr. Bruckner. Oh, let us get down to hardpan. 



The Chairman. Is there any objection on your part to frame 

 your questions in that way ? 



Mr. McGuire. Oh, no. I do not want to be placed in the position 

 here of asking improper questions. That question, however, does 

 not call for an opinion of the witness. That question calls for a fact 

 The witness stated the facts as he understands them to be. If I 

 ask whether any statement is true or false, if he knows, he can state, 

 so it is not an opinion. But I will see if we can not get along with- 

 out any friction. 



The Chairman. I believe we can, if you will just direct the witness's 

 attention to what you want him to explain, and let him do it in his 

 own way. 



Mr. McGuire. I think probably we can manage it all right. 



The Chairman. Let us try it, anyhow. 



Mr. McGuire. Mr. Lembkey, you say that this charge that you 

 were frequently at Liebes's in 1900 was made, and that in fact you 

 never met Liebes until eight or nine years after that ? Is that true ? 



Mi-. Lembkey. That is true. 



Mr. McGuire. Do you know why Mr. Elliott would make a state- 

 ment of that kind ? 



Mr. Lembkey. I have no idea — that is, I do not know. 



Mr. McGuire. The statement in the Elliott report which you have 

 just read is to the effect that Liebes recommended you for the posi- 



