432 OCTOBER TERM, 1907. Opinion of t? Court. ?00 U. ?, n? p?t we? in p? of ? ?ffo? ? a?id, '?y or M?y, the ?b?ty, ? not p?, of ? ?d ?ble ?m?tion.' "It ? f?he? d?l? by the ?timony t?t ?e ? ? for ?e ?mp?ion of ?t?n, ??g ? ? �e?of ? i? ?. ?at ?s for the ?g of eot?n ? ?b?h? by the ? ? web ? ?g ?t?e? or ?, ? wMch the ? of cot?n m?t ? one way, or othe? the M?er m?, denomlu? t? ? m?, sppli?, ?nde? it ?fi?ble ? sMp ? o?er t? ? ?b? ?t in the ? ?t?ct." ?d the co? ? t?t from th? f?, ?d othe? ?fe? ? supping them, it ?ot ? doub? t?t the obj? of t? G? ?m?y ?d ? ? co?tion, ?e A? ?mp? ?m?y? "? ? p?vent ?m?t?on ? ?mp? ?on of cot?n t?u?out the cot?n-p?uc? S?." ?e ? dec? it ? ? i? ?ud?nt t?t "not o?y ? the en? p? ? w?ch the G? ?mp? ?m?y ? en? ? ?- ? one, ? now ?nduc?, but the ?n?t ? .qu?on ? t? ?, ?g ?e ? f?her i? obj? ?d p?, ? void on ?e ?d t?t it ? ? ?ble ?t of ?e ?d a?imt pubic ?cy." ? concleon ? the ?t an? of t?t ? by ?e ? co? ?d we ? bmu?t ? the ?q?, ? it j?? ?e e?dence ca?ot ? ?ven ? de?, ?d we ?y ?y at the oust t?t the? ? no quezon ? ? i? well,we ? not confrontal ?th confiict?g ?timo?. ? b?ch of the c? ? Co?titu?d of the l?e, p?nci?y of the ?timony of one ?tn?, the p?sident of ?e G? ?m?ny, ?d of f? wh?c? ? not d?pu?d. The other ?mony, a ?t de? of which ? document, ? m?y d?c?d ? the ?nan- ci? con&tion of the Sha? Comply ? the inducem?t of the 1? ?d ? the pr?ee? token ? autho? i? ex- ?ution. There ? ?o ?timony ?d a?imt the p? and mo?v? of the ap?H?, ?d some ?n?g ? show t?t one of the offi? ?d s?olde? of the S? ?m?y
�
