The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1878-09-13

which patent had been issued and prin-
cipal Isl .28O) paid in full. The money in
his hands he stated was g, 1880, prin-
cipal: 1921 .33, interest; total $2,770.73;
which amount was then and there re-
ceived from him. Witness asked if that
was a full account of his transactions to
that time? Bancroft said twas. Asked
Bancroft if he kept any books, noting
sales? Said he did not. Demanded, on
behalf of the board, all papers pertain
ing to these lands in his possession. He
handed witness a small book, together
with papers on which had been written
the description of the lands, and appraise-
ment by former appraisers Requested
him not to sell any more lands, or to act
as agent for board until their meeting,
as they intended to re-appraise the lands
before offering any more for sale, and
told him to notify parties who had inter
est to pay to send it to DIR. Wright. In
the conversation had there witness stated
to Bancroft that he was surprised that he
had sold these lands without notifying
the board. 1t placed the board in very
awkward position before the public.
Bancroft again said that no one had call
ed for report. Witness stated that Mr..
Cross had informed him that Bancroft
had reported at different times that he
could not sell the lands. Witness stated
to Bancroft that he had not known of his
appointment as agent, and asked where
he got his authority. Bancroft said he
was appointed by the board of which he
was a member, and went on to state that
he himself had framed the law for the
sale of these lands; all the fees he got he
turned over to his sub-agents. Bancroft
turned over the interest on time deposit
at Topeka, $5S.45. Witness could not
give the amount of deposit Thought it
was the 1920 received for the quarter
section on which the patent had been is
sued. Drew checks on First National
bank of Emporia for part of the sum
paid at the interview BancrOft's state
ment had been prepared beforehand. Wit
ness had examined records of board. Had
no knowledge of Bancroft ever being au-
thOriZed to use the money arising from
the sale of land. Witness learned of
other sales than those reported at that
time, in the fall of 1877. In February,
| 1878, witness went to Saline county, Kan
SaS /; went upon these lands to make a
personal examination of their condition
and occupants. Found nearly all occu-
pied, and parties thereon holding con-
| tracts from Bancroft, with receipts from
| same source. On his return to Emporia,
in the latter part of February, was shown
/ report made by Bancroft during his alb
sence, described in evidence as plat re-
pOrt.) DR.. Wright and witness went
down to BancrOft's Office in day or two.
Witness said to Bancroft that he under
stood that he had made another report,
| and asked if this was a full report! Ban
croft said it was. CrichtOn said, From
| that report it appears you owe the State
| about $S,00O," which Bancroft admit
| ted, but said, when demand was made by
| CrichtOn, that he could not pay it. Ban
| croft could not tell what he had done
| with the money. Had used it for differ
ent things. Had expected to have been
able to pay it, but depreciation of prop.
erty, hard times, &c, had made him I'm,
able to raise it, but thought he would be
able to pay it in a couple of years. Had
lots which he could dispose of when re
leased from the mortgage of the Loan
Association, and his business & building
would bring him a certain income. Wit
ness asked him to examine letters by
Major Burk; went to the other room and
did so, after which witness and DIR. Wright
left.
| WEDNESDAYS PROCEEDINGS.
r. r. Moore chief clerk in the State
| Treasurer's Office, was called. Testified
to the effect that he receipted for money
and made entries of the same; that he
/ had examined the State Treasurer's rec
ord with regard to the sale of Normal
lands, and that no monies had been paiC
into the treasury in that fund other than
those named in written statement in evi
dence. Statement was read to jury)
A. Sellers, Alma, Waubaunsee county
was next witness. Had been a Regen
since the spring of 1876. Mr.. Sellers de
tailed the facts with reference to meet
ing of the Regents at Merchants Hotel
I sanlNf A1rUn II ,sn.I,
and Sellers were present. Witness sug
gested to Mr.. Murdoch to ask Bancroft
by what authority he acted as agent, an(
if he could show any record evidence O
that authority? Bancroft stated it coulC
be found in the proceedings of the board
Asked Bancroft if he had any letter o.
commission of authority? Bancroft sait
he had, but could not produce. it. erich
ton picked up report and asked if tina
was Bancroft's report; if he did not pre-
viously say he had given full report
and if when he paid over money to Dr.
Wright he did not make further re
port of lands claimed to be before oyer
looked? Bancroft answered all thes
questions affirmatively. CrichtOn callet
Bancroft's attention to discrepancy be
tween his (Crichton's) and BancrOft's re
port, CrichtOn's showing more mOnel
than BancrOft's. This was money re
ceived for lands forfeited, of which Ban
croft had given no account, and abOu
which Bancroft said he had taken lega
Il advice, and had been told that he wOult
be individually responsible, hence hat
4 noS reported. Discrepancy was proba
d; bly, $500 to 5000. Bancroft said that h
appreciated his position; that he was a
the mercy of the board; that they coult
bring both civil and criminal actor
against him. Witness stated the sam
as has previously been given with regart
!, to Bancroft's financial condition ant
promises to pay. Board had never t.
his knowledge authorized Bancroft t
use money in any way. CrichtOn ant
Wright were present at the meeting onl,
Il portion of the time. On cross exam
inatiOn witness said he knew of mo dis
IpOsition of Bancroft to avoid a meeting
with the board Understood from Wrigh
that he had expressed a desire to NEE
them. After Bancroft left, his PROPOSE
ton to reimburse was talked over. Die
not know of any member that was il
favor of accepting it, in fact proposition
! was of nature impossible to accept
Bancroft offered no security. Meeting
was held Saturday evening, March I'd
1873.
Crichton was recalled. Corrected on
4 IhO stdOCH4cuJ. OaN
, testimony as to the meeting at Mel chant
Hotel, the main points of which hav
been given. Murdoch, acting presiden
of the board, said to Bancroft that h
} understood he wished to make a state
) ment and cautioned him to say nothing
, to criminate himself. Board did no
want to lead him to believe that a full
confession would settle the matter. Ban
croft said he had nothing to hold back
u Knew he had done wrong, and was sui
fect to prosecution Bancroft enumel
ated his resources, etc. Witness asket
J Bancroft number of questions as to hi
} report, and sale of land, detailing Gel
J tain sales contained in his (Crichton's
report. Cgiehton finally got up and lef
the room. Thought plat report was il
J Bancroft's handwriting.
NJ. NJ. Murdoch, Wichita, was called
Has been regent or director since Apri
1878. Was not aware until last year o
BancrOft's agency. Saw it in record
Only conversation had with Bancroft b,
witness was one in Merchants Hotel
Facts stated in regard to this were il
substantiatiOn of previous evidence
Many points in the conversation witnes
could not recollect. Said Crichton asket
; questions, and answers not being salts
factory, Crichton left the room in huff
and Bancroft made further explanation
which he said he did not want TO max
before Crichton, because Chrichton wa
unreasonable. On cross examination