Mr. McLEAN. Tell whom you mean by "the chief."

Mr. HUNTER. Hassell.

Senator KING. Was he a man of technical knowledge and geological knowledge employed by the commission?

Mr. HUNTER. He was supposed to be.

Senator KING. And did the commissioners usually, if there was no serious controversy, follow his recommendation as to the location? Mr. HUNTER. They did, except when it was controverted and they heard evidence on it.

Senator KING. Then, here was a case where there was no objection to the granting of the permit, but the difficulty was as to where the well should be located?

Mr. HUNTER. They had first objected that there should be no well at all. The commission had ruled that there would be one. The two that were present had ruled that there would be one, and then the dispute arose about where the one would be located, and it was a matter of location that I went to Sherman on.

Senator KING. Were hearings frequently held in this informal way: You would talk with the chief, the chief oil expert, and— Mr. HUNTER. Always, very informal.

Senator KING. And then he would present to the various commissioners, when they were together or separately, his conclusions? Mr. HUNTER. They never held any session except when evidence was being heard.

Senator KING. I see.

Mr. NICKELS. They did hold a session on this permit that day after you had been to the commissioners' offices, did they not?

Mr. HUNTER. Yes, sir. I was at their office just before and after the hearing.

Mr. NICKELS. And Gilmore would not approve the application at that time, but wanted to take it under advisement, and so announced from what we would call the bench there in the hearing room, did he not? He told these people who were contesting the application on back home and they would take the case under advisement and notify them of the disposition; did he not?

to

go

Mr. HUNTER. Well, now, as to just what he said, I do not remember any statement like that.

Mr. NICKELS. Well, the hearing adjourned, and they took the application under advisement, did they not, publicly?

Mr. HUNTER. That is my recollection.

Mr. NICKELS. Then you got on the train and went to Sherman and got the concurrence of the other commissioner?

Mr. HUNTER. After I had first gone home; that is my recollection about that.

Mr. NICKELS. And you got the application signed up by the two commissioners before Gilmore had ever announced his decision; did you not?

Mr. HUNTER. I think I did. He had announced a decision, but he had not given it to me in writing, because I had not asked for it. Senator KING. Did he concur?

Mr. HUNTER. I do not know whether he signed the last one or not, Senator. I do not recall. I do not recall. It only took two members, and I am not sure now whether he signed it or not. It was not necessary, so far as I was concerned, that he should sign it.

Senator WATSON. When you went down to see Allison Mayfield, was there any conversation between you and him in regard to Earle Mayfield's candidacy for the senatorship?

Mr. HUNTER. Not a word was said about it.

Mr. NICKELS. Mr. Hunter, do you now recall having a conversation with Mr. Joseph Barwise on the train going to Austin the night before this hearing?

Mr. HUNTER. I had a conversation with him; yes, sir.

Mr. NICKELS. State whether or not it is a fact that in that conversation you told Mr. Barwise, in substance, after ascertaining the object of his mission to Austin, that if he would give you a thous and dollars you would get the permit?

Mr. HUNTER. I did not make that kind of a proposition to any man in the world about any law suit. I have had all the practice that two men ought to have done. I have been under treatment of a physician for 12 months for overpractice, and my fees are such that it was not necessary that I solicit under a barratry statute, and, being a lawyer of Texas, you ought to know better.

Mr. NICKELS. I am asking you whether you made the statement

or not.

Mr. HUNTER. I did not.

Mr. NICKELS. All right.

Senator NEELY. I should like to make an inquiry. Are you laying the foundation now for impeaching your own witness, Mr. Nickels?

Mr. NICKELS. No, Senator.

Mr. HUNTER. His remark is an insulting remark that a gentleman from Texas, knowing the barratry statute of Texas, should not make. Mr. NICKELS. Well, I will be down on the Avenue after a while. The CHAIRMAN. Proceed with the examination, gentlemen. Mr. NICKELS. I believe that is all.

Mr. MCLEAN. Mr. Hunter, is it anything unusual at Wichita Falls, Tex., or the other Texas towns, for the lawyers to contribute even to the campaign funds of judges before whom they have to practice law?

Mr. HUNTER. I have done it, and have known of others doing it. Mr. McLEAN. Is it not an invariable custom for the lawyers, when they want to elect a judge, to go out and get up a campaign fund and put him over if they can?

Mr. HUNTER. It is, because the salary is not sufficient to warrant the expenditure of the money necessary to procure the election. Mr. McLEAN. Is it not a fact that frequently men in Texas who are supporting a candidate for a State office or any other kind of office raise money independently of his campaign manager and send it independently of him?

Mr. HUNTER. I do not know whether I get your question or not. Mr. McLEAN. State whether or not it frequently occurs that men in Texas raise money for their candidate and spend money for their candidate without it ever going to his campaign manager or to the knowledge of the man running for office.

Mr. HUNTER. It is done, and I have done that in other campaigns myself.

Mr. MOLEAN. Did you at any time let Earle Mayfield know, through your own mouth or pen, that you had contributed anything to his campaign?

Mr. HUNTER. I never did.

Mr. MCLEAN. Were you or not supporting him, and had you not supported him for years, when he made his various campaigns in Texas?

Mr. HUNTER. I had supported him in every race he made in Texas, beginning with the first race for the commission.

Mr. McLEAN. The railroad commission? He was in the State senate, but that was not in your district?

Mr. HUNTER. It was not in my district.

Mr. McLEAN. You are not related to J. L. Hunter?

Mr. HUNTER. I am not.

Mr. MCLEAN. Now, going back to practice before the railroad commission, is it not a fact that frequently all an attorney has to do. when his client comes to him for a permit, is to write to one of the railroad commissioners and ask for the permit?

Mr. HUNTER. That is the usual practice.

Mr. McLEAN. Do you know whether or not it was usual there, when the railroad commission took charge of the oil department, for gentlemen to go to the rooms of the commissioners or meet them in the hotel and tell them what they wanted.

Mr. HUNTER. I have done it. I have talked to them at their rooms, and known other lawyers to do so. It was a very informal matter, and was never considered anything but informal, except when there was evidence being heard on the case.

Mr. ZUMBRUNN. That is, on a controverted question?

Mr. HUNTER. Yes.

Mr. MCLEAN. To get back to this one particular instance, and then I am through, this narrow strip of land that you claimed in this controversy-there were parties owning the adjoining land on either and all sides of it?

Mr. HUNTER. That is correct.

Mr. MCLEAN. Those parties did not want you or anybody else to drill a well on this narrow strip by reason of the fact that if there was oil under there it would get some of their oil?

Mr. HUNTER. It would get some of theirs, and if we did not drill they would get all of ours.

Mr. MCLEAN. Now, within your knowledge, has the railroad commission ever denied a man who had but a small tract of land the right to drive as many as one well, to your knowledge?

Mr. HUNTER. Not to my knowledge; no, sir. They have always granted one well on any strip large enough to put the well on, so far as I know.

Mr. MCLEAN. Large enough to put the derrick on; that is all. Senator KING. Referring to this $500 that you paid, did you pay it by check?

Mr. HUNTER. I paid it by cash, Senator.

Senator KING. To Mr. Hunter?

Mr. HUNTER. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Are you both through with Mr. Hunter?
Mr. NICKELS. I think so, Senator.

The CHAIRMAN. May he now be excused?
Mr. MCLEAN and Mr. ZUMBRUNN. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hunter, you are excused.

Mr. NICKELS. There is one question that I had overlooked.
The CHAIRMAN. Very well; proceed.

Mr. NICKELS. Do you know anything about Mr. J. L. Hunter coming to Wichita to make solicitations of funds?

Mr. HUNTER. Nothing more than a conversation with him.

Mr. NICKELS. You saw him there at the time. Can you approximate the date?

Mr. HUNTER. I saw him on either two or three occasions, Mr. Nickels.

Mr. NICKELS. Were any of the occasions before this hearing at Austin?

Mr. HUNTER. One was.

Mr. NICKELS. And you saw him afterwards on two occasions or one occasion?

Mr. HUNTER. I saw him on one or two occasions. I saw him on two or three occasions altogether. I am pretty sure that one of them was after the hearing at Austin.

Mr. NICKELS. Did he or not solicit you at that time for a contribution?

Mr. HUNTER. The last time?

Mr. NICKELS. Either time.

Mr. HUNTER. I do not believe that he ever solicited me for a contribution, because I had told him what I would do. I had given him a pledge, and I kept that pledge.

Mr. NICKELS. Did you or not meet John C. Townes, jr., of Huston, at Wichita Falls, in connection with the solicitation of contributions? Mr. HUNTER. I never met him in connection with any solicitation. I know John C. Townes.

Mr. NICKELS. But so far as you know, you never met him in that connection?

Mr. HUNTER. No, sir.

Mr. NICKELS. And never talked to him about campaign contributions at any place?

Mr. HUNTER. I talked to him about the campaign at one time, but not with reference to contributions.

Mr. NICKELS. I mean with reference to contributions.

Mr. Hun

ter, did you sign depositions in what is known as the Corsicana injunction case?

Mr. HUNTER. I did.

Mr. NICKELS. I believe that is all.

Senator KING. What is the prpose of that question? Do you intend to follow it up by offering his depositions?

Mr. NICKELS. I am not right certain, Senator, that the depositions were ever returned.

Mr. HUNTER. I have a copy of the depositions, Mr. Nickels, if you care to look at it.

Mr. NICKELS. Have you got it with you?

Mr. HUNTER. I have got it with me now.

Mr. NICKELS. Let me see it, please.

(Mr. Hunter produced a paper and handed it to Mr. Nickels.)

Mr. NICKELS. My recollection is that they got back too late to be used in the case, and they may not be in this record that we have got here. I am not positive about it.

Mr. ZUMBRUNN. Are they a matter of court record?

Mr. NICKELS. They ought to be. As a matter of fact I have no recollection about seeing the entries.

Mr. HUNTER. I do not think we used them.

Mr. NICKELS. I understand they were filed there.

Mr. MCLEAN. That is a matter we can look up later on. Mr. Hunter, if you are excused to-day, you do not leave the city until 4 o'clock or something. We will let you know at noon whether or not we can excuse you.

Mr. NICKELS. Can you leave this here conveniently?

Mr. HUNTER. It is the only copy I have. I do not mind your looking it over, but I would rather preserve a record of it. That is the only record I have.

Mr. NICKELS. Apparently this paper does not show the date when they were answered. Do you now recall?

Senator WATSON. What paper is that?

Senator KING. It is a copy of a deposition which he gave in the Corsicana injunction case.

Mr. HUNTER. Some week or 10 days before that Corsicana hearing began, as I recall. I could not fix the date.

The CHAIRMAN. Have not we the record of the depositions in that case?

Mr. NICKELS. We have the record of such as were actually introduced in evidence, Senator, but whether this one was introduced or not, I am not certain at this time. I do not think it was. Mr. HUNTER. It was not introduced.

Mr. NICKELS. It may have been filed.

Mr. McLEAN. Mr. Hunter, about Senator Mayfield meeting you at the train, you wired him to meet you, did you not?

Mr. HUNTER. I did.

Mr. McLEAN. And you had a conversation with Senator Mayfield in my presence, did you not, at the hotel?

Mr. HUNTER. I did.

Mr. MCLEAN. In which it was said that you were just to bust the whole truth out and tell the whole truth about the matter; that we did not want to hear anything else, and you said that was all you were going to do? Is that the extent of the conversation?

Mr. HUNTER. That is the extent of it.

Mr. NICKELS. How long did it take to make that statement to you? Mr. HUNTER. It was not necessary that we meet at all, Mr. Nickels. Mr. NICKELS. I understand that, Mr. Hunter. You were in this conference from almost the instant you got off the train until 11 o'clock last night, were you not?

Mr. HUNTER. No: I was not.

Mr. NICKELS. How long were you in the conference?

Mr. HUNTER. Probably 20 minutes. I went into my room, and they summoned me an osteopath, and I never saw Mr. Earle Mayfield or Mr. McLean after that until I went to sleep.

Mr. MCLEAN. I wonder who that osteopath was? The CHAIRMAN. You are excused, Mr. Hunter. witness.

That is all.
Call your next