(Testimony taken separately before Senator William Alden Smith, chairman of the subcommittee.)
(The witness was sworn by Senator Smith.)
Senator SMITH.
State your full name, please.
Mr. DAULER.
Frederick Dauler.
Senator SMITH.
What is your business?
Mr. DAULER.
I am a clerk for the Western Union Telegraph Co.
Senator SMITH.
How old are you?
Mr. DAULER.
Fifty-seven years old.
Senator SMITH.
How long have you been with the Western Union Telegraph Co.?
Mr. DAULER.
Forty-one years.
Senator SMITH.
As such clerk what are your duties?
Mr. DAULER.
My duty is that of an attendant at the delivery window. I attend all customers, telephones, etc.
Senator SMITH.
You receive messages from the operating room through a chute?
Mr. DAULER.
Yes, sir; we have a chute, which is about 8 or 9 inches in diameter, which drops down from the eighth floor.
Senator SMITH.
You address these messages?
Mr. DAULER.
We have clerks on the desk right there by the tube to address the telegrams.
Senator SMITH.
Do you address any of them yourself?
Mr. DAULER.
No, sir.
Senator SMITH.
You receive these messages; and do you apportion them among these clerks?
Mr. DAULER.
I get them when the other clerks do not know what to do with them. I am supposed to finish them up.
Senator SMITH.
If a telegram should be received at your office and it was so directed that the address would not be readily known, they would refer it to you?
Mr. DAULER.
Yes.
Senator SMITH.
And you would look it up?
Mr. DAULER.
Yes.
Senator SMITH.
And then you would have the message addressed and delivered?
Mr. DAULER.
Yes, sir.
Senator SMITH.
Were you on duty on Monday, April 15?
Mr. DAULER.
Yes, sir.
Senator SMITH.
Between what hours?
Mr. DAULER.
From 7 in the morning until half past 4 o'clock in the afternoon.
Senator SMITH.
While you were on duty, did any cable or wireless message come through your hands addressed to "Islefrank"?
Mr. DAULER.
Not on Monday the 15th.
Senator SMITH.
On Tuesday?
Mr. DAULER.
On Tuesday I saw two.
Senator SMITH.
What did they say?
Mr. DAULER.
It was in reference to the Cedric, from "Yamsi."
Senator SMITH.
Was the name "Islefrank" known to you?
Mr. DAULER.
No, sir; for the reason that it was not known to the other clerks, it came to me. We generally had a record of all those code words in our book. We did not have it in this instance, and it was referred to me, and I sent a note to our cable department, 16 Broad Street. We send things down by tube, and make it "C. O." or "commercial." When our company has no code registration for these particular words, they ship them over to the commercial company.
In the meantime, I sent this note down. One of the other clerks saw the telegrams and surmised that it belonged to the White Star Line. Of course, I did, too. So, he had nothing to do at the time, and he went to the telephone and got the address from the cable office by telephone. In the meantime mine came back, just the same.
Senator SMITH.
It is customary, is it not, to make delivery of wireless messages through the Western Union when the addressee is unknown to the wireless company?
Mr. DAULER.
There are a good many of those that come to us, probably wireless, but not otherwise; that is, from London, they go down to the cable office. Wireless messages are sent by some people who are traveling foreigners, for instance, going from place to place, under a code word, although it is against the rules of the company to accept such telegrams. For instance, a man in Detroit sends a telegram to any particular name, and of course we are not supposed to deliver it. We are supposed to notify him back: "See rule so-and-so pertaining to code addresses."
Senator SMITH.
But you do deliver them? They are delivered occasionally, just the same?
Mr. DAULER.
Wireless telegrams we deliver.
Senator SMITH.
If the Marconi Co. received a wireless message, and did not know the address or name of the person to whom the message was addressed, they would send it through the Western Union for delivery; and they do occasionally, do they not?
Mr. DAULER.
Yes, sir.
Senator SMITH.
And you have frequently handled such message?
Mr. DAULER.
Yes; very often. It is a daily occurrence.
Senator SMITH.
And in that way you are obliged to read the message in order to identify it as far as you can?
Mr. DAULER.
As far as we can; yes, sir.
Senator SMITH.
And if there is anything in the message that discloses the person for whom it is intended, then you pass it on, through your messenger boys to such person?
Mr. DAULER.
I make the inquiry from our cable office, to make sure. Of course from reading the telegrams we get information as to whom we think they are intended for, and if we have time we telephone those people to find out whether they are for them.
Senator SMITH.
On Monday, the 15th day of April, following the Titanic disaster you and your son talked over that disaster?
Mr. DAULER.
No, sir.
Senator SMITH.
Did you not see your son on Monday?
Mr. DAULER.
No, sir. My son lives around the corner from where I live. He calls every Sunday morning to see me and his mother. On that Sunday morning that was five days, almost a week; after the Titanic disaster, I had the newspaper before me. I generally read the paper before he comes. He came in and he said, "What is new?" That is what he generally says after he comes in and says "Good morning" and so on. I said, "There is nothing new that I know of, only that it is quite a disaster, this Titanic affair." He says, "It is awful." That is as nearly as I can think now.
Senator SMITH.
Did you not see your son after the Titanic disaster until the following Sunday?
Mr. DAULER.
No, sir.
Senator SMITH.
Did you know of his talk with Mr. Dunn?
Mr. DAULER.
No, sir; not until I saw it in the newspaper. Then I knew who was referred to.
Senator SMITH.
How can you account for that conversation between your son and Mr. Dunn, when Mr. Dunn swears that this telegram, which passed through your hands and which was known to your son, related to the sinking of the Titanic?
Mr. DAULER.
I can not account for any such telegram whatever. I did not see anything. In fact, it is all new to me. I do not know what he referred to at all.
Senator SMITH.
Why has he avoided for several days the plain statement of the facts?
Mr. DAULER.
As I understand from what I saw in the newspapers my son was afraid that I would lose my position if anything got out about it, because I happened to talk to him about the thing. Of course, I read in the papers, every day, about it. The other day I went to my man in the Western Union, R. G. Wilson, and I told him in reference to what I saw in the newspapers; and I saw my son the night before, and I told him I wished to square this thing up; that I would like to go and see the Senator; that I would like permission from the company to see the Senator. He asked me what it was and I told him so and so - I had two minutes conversation with my son and my son afterward conversed with somebody else. I told him the telegrams that were in the paper were the telegrams that I saw; two of the three that were in the paper I did see.
Senator SMITH.
Did you say anything to your son about the White Star people withholding information for purposes of reinsurance?
Mr. DAULER.
No, sir. I did not know the first thing about it.
Senator SMITH.
And you are very positive that you did not talk with your son during the week following the disaster, and did not see him at all?
Mr. DAULER.
Yes, sir. I do not see my son except on Sunday morning.
Senator SMITH.
Is it not rather unusual that you should live only a block apart and not see each other more frequently than that?
Mr. DAULER.
No, sir; there is nothing unusual about it. I do not think I see my son once in six months except on Sunday. I do not go out of the house myself, and he comes to see me on Sunday morning. I go to bed every night at 9 o'clock and get up at half-past 5.
Senator SMITH.
If you had no information and had not communicated anything to him and through him to Mr. Dunn, why so much mystery about who you were and who your son was, and the evident desire to prevent your name from being made public?
Mr. DAULER.
My son feared I would lose my job; that is the only thing. Otherwise he would have gone.
I honestly tell you that my son telephoned to me and said, "What do you think that so-and-so ?" I said, "If you have the opportunity, by all means go to see Senator Smith at Washington and tell him the whole story. I see nothing in it."
Senator SMITH.
He did not go.
Mr. DAULER.
He was advised differently by somebody else, I suppose, and took the other person's advice.
Senator SMITH.
And Mr. Dunn was prevented by your son's efforts from disclosing his name.
Mr. DAULER.
I know nothing about what transpired between my son and Mr. Dunn; but I do know that my son was on the telephone -
Senator SMITH.
Do you wish to be understood as saying that no telegram passed through your hands on Monday following this accident to the Titanic, which you read and which disclosed the fact that the ship had sunk?
Mr. DAULER.
No telegram whatever on Monday following the Titanic disaster; and there are only two telegrams that I saw. Those two telegrams were printed the following Sunday, four days after the telegrams actually came. That is how the conversation came along.
Senator SMITH.
Did you not say to your son that it was all nonsense for the White Star people to say they did not know about this on Monday, because you knew about it?
Mr. DAULER.
No, sir.
Senator SMITH. (continuing)
And sent a wireless message over to them by your messenger boy?
Mr. DAULER.
No, sir; I did not see my son from the time of the Titanic disaster until the following Sunday.
My son formerly worked for the Western Union, and he knew that if any operator or employee gave out any information in reference to a telegram he would be immediately discharged.
For that reason he did not care to go to Washington and appear before the committee, I guess on account of my place being in jeopardy, and he kept away. But when he got me on the telephone, I could not, for the life of me, see anything in it at all. It was simply that I saw a telegram, and only told my own son a week after the Titanic disaster. I said; "By all means, if you have an opportunity, go on to Washington and see the Senator, and settle the whole thing." But he must have gotten advice from somebody else, who advised him differently. The other night he came up to my house and said he had seen Senator Smith, and he told me just what the whole thing was, just as I am telling you here; and I believe he said something about your having told him to see me. I do not know anything about that.
Senator SMITH.
I did.
Mr. DAULER.
Anyhow, he did call up to see me. Then the next morning I went to my manager and I said to him, "Mr. Wilson, there is a whole lot of newspaper notoriety, and I am only too glad to go and explain the whole situation to the Senator. It looks so mysterious, and still there is nothing in it whatever."
Senator SMITH.
You have said everything that you care to say bearing upon this matter?
Mr. DAULER.
Yes, sir.
Senator SMITH.
You had nothing whoever to do with your son's refusal to disclose the names, or to appear before the committee?
Mr. DAULER.
No, sir.
Senator SMITH.
And nothing whatever to do with silencing Mr. Dunn?
Mr. DAULER.
No, sir; I know nothing of what was going on between him and Mr. Dunn.
Senator SMITH.
Do you know that this information was given to Mr. Dunn under the promise that he would not reveal the name of his informant?
Mr. DAULER.
I suppose such is the case, but I know nothing about it.
Senator SMITH.
That, in itself, might look as though the information was important?
Mr. DAULER.
Yes; but there was nothing important about it whatever. You have the whole thing in your hands.
Senator SMITH.
That is all you want to say, is it?
Mr. DAULER.
I am willing to say anything I know.
Senator SMITH.
That is all you can say?
Mr. DAULER.
That is all I can say. There were two telegrams, and I would not have dared tell it to anybody else except my own son; and then it was only a few minutes' conversation.
Senator SMITH.
That is all.
(Witness Excused.)