The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1878-09-20

1875. Didn't specify any number OF
tracts-used the term few or several N
one was present at conversation with
Pomeroy; none Immediately near when
talking with Cross. Didn't remember
when Prof. Hoss left the Normal. Per
haps in 1874 The resident members OF
the old board were s. b. Riggs, II. Ban
croft and defendant. Neither Hoss or
Cross were members of the old board.
i In interview at Bancroft's office Wright
and Crichton did not say that they
were there as a committee to demand
money, but to receive report of proceed
ings. Had a memorandum prepared.
DIR. Wright or some member of the board
had asked that it be made. Had some
intimation of the committee being APP
pointed to wait on him. Had prepared
the report previous to their going there.
Could not tell what tracts were embraced
in it. Thought he begun at that time
and reported backwards. Did not re-
member reporting any forfeited lands.
Did not remember any names of purchas-
ers. Reported backward because that
was the money he had to pay over. The
Patrick Hall land was reported. Didn't
remember stating that one tract was for
feited or that interest was due and paid
on one tract. Had no means OF knowing
how many acres of land were reported
sold at that time. Reported sufficient to
cover the amount of money on hand.
The only reason for reporting backward
was because that would naturally be the
money he had. Witness was asked a
question regarding the published report
of 1872, referred to in Riggs testimony.
Lively discussion ensued as to whether
or not this question could be asked in
cross-eXamination, and it was finally ex-
cluded. The purpose of the question
was to show that while he at that time
reported no lands sold, in fact four
pieces had been sold. Witness said he
stated that he didn't deposit money be-
Office, possibly to Wright and Chrichton,
and at the hotel meeting of the board.
Thought Lappin was in Office about a
year. Was not in office April 10, 1877.
| Could't fix dates. Stated to Wright that
Hayes had refused to receive interest
money. Had never rendered him money
but parties who owed interest had done
so. Knew of it by letters from them.
Had never reported to state treasurer any
lands sold or moneys received. Did not
remember that Crichton ordered him
not to sell any more lands on account of
/ the intention to reappraise them. Never
knew lands were to be reappraised until
the spring of 1873. Did not remember
that Crichton asked him at Merchants
Hotel meeting whether he had not stat1d
to Crichton and Wright that his first
| report was a correct one at the time of
making it. Remembered Crichton
asking how they were to believe this
(plat report) to be full report Remem-
bered Crichton reading off list of sales.
Did not say at that meeting that he had
made those sales, but said he did not
have data to determine. Thought he
could by reference to memoranda tell
about sales of forfeited lands Did make
full report March 2, 1873, of all transac-
tions to the board with the explanation
that he gave then. Explained that lands
| sold twice on which purchasers had for
teited their rights were not included in
report. Had not examined the informa-
ton filed to any extent, or the exhibit
attached to it. Could not state amount
of moneys which had been received on
lands forfeited. Answer would be the
merest guess in the world. Had memo
randum of them which he had been
ready to produce at any time since
April 1S, 1877. Subsequent payments
to DIR. Wright about $4,000. Produced
receipts which were read as follows:
April 1S, 1877. Principal So, 1880 In
terest, $679.66. Total, $2,828, GO. June
8, 1877, $45.OT. July 16, $168.00. July
26, $4,000. Nov. 80, s., 924.7O. Receipts
compared with Dr. Wright's record as
treasurer and found to correspond Was
asked if on April %, 1877, he sold land
to Frederick Yungle and received there
tor $1OO,S0. Admitted that he had Was
| asked what he did with the money.
Thought it must have been included in
first receipt. Was shown that that re-
| ceipt was dated April IS, 1877, five days
before. Didn't think it could have been
paid then to DR.. Wright at all. Didn't
tender it to DIR. Wright or send it to
state treasury. He was then asked if he
had on June 20, 1876, sold land to
Emmanuel Throne, and received thereon
$40. Objected to, because this land was
sold after the revocation of Bancroft's
agency, hence there was no prosecution
thereon. Prosecution claimed the right
to Introduce it on the ground that Ban
croft had sworn that if at any time he
had been able to pay the money would
have done so. Proposed to prove that
since April 10, 1867, he had received
over $4,000 of which he had not paid a
single cent. Question decided admissi-
BILE, and defendant said he did not pay
1t to Wright or state treasurer.
FRIDAY MORNING.
| CrosS-eXamlnatlOn was continued for
same purpose as before, with reference
to various tracts of land--defendant be-
ing Intercepted with reference to his
disposition of the money he received for
each-as follows: ,
------ Hawker, $42. Paid to
DR.. Wright
Nov. 20, 1877.-Patrick Hall, -. Paid
to DIR. Wright.
June IS, 1877.-Jos. Arnold, $112.
Paid to DIR. Wright.
| Dec. 10, 2877.-Martin johnson, S54.
| DID not pay to treasurer.
Dec. 20, 1S77.-J. w. Burks, =. Did
not pay to treasurer.
Nov. 10, 1877.-J. W. Burks, $3.50.
Paid to DIR. Wright
June IL, 1S77.-M. A. Phillips, $3.50.
Did not pay to treasurer.
| June IL, 1S77.-M. A. Phillips, 1855.
Did not pay to treasurer.
Oct. 10, 1377.-M. A. Phillips. S5s
Did not pay to treasurer
June %, 18U.-J. w. Aldna, $50 Paid
to DR.. Wright.
| June 9th, 1877.-P. B. Matthew. sos.
Did not pay to treasurer.
Sept. 9th, 18TH. Shank, S112.5O.
Did not pay to treasurer.
| Oct. I'D, 1S77.-John d. Bean, 800. 20.
Did not pay to treasurer
Dec. 10th, 1S77-John W. Burke, four
payments as follows: $500, $56.63, $50
$51.77, which defendant said he had
made arrangements to return to Burke
bdt had not done so as vet.
July 18th, 1s77-D. Hanson, $50. Did
not pay to treasurer.
Jan. 10, 1878.-Robert w. Lee, $50.
Did not pay to treasurer.
Defendant Thought he had the last paw
ment on hand when he made the last re-
port, but did not know certainly that he
had Did not pay it because not request
ed to do SO. Sale made about thirty
days before the report was delivered.
IN HAND. = An equabie temper is
greatly to be admired. The man or wo-
man who always has himself or herself
well in hand, who is cool under all an
noyances and circumstances, who has
absolute control of the temper, we are
always willing TO trust in any emergency.
But person who flashes like powder
u .....cl.,.c. u