The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1888-02-24
GOULD AND SAGE.
a Grand Jury Trying to Find Out II They
Really Did Steal % 200. 900.

Grand Jury Trying to Find Out II They
Really Did Steal eS 100000.
NEW YoRK, Feb. 1.-THE charges against
Jay Gould and Russell Sage, made on be-
half Of the stockholders OF the Kansas Pa.
cinc railroad. Of appropriatine to their own
use &, GOO 000 Of the company's bonds, went
to tho grand jury yesterday morning. The
Jury was given oil documents bearing on
the case, and next Monday witnesses will
be summoned. These will include the com.
plainant security holders, about twenty in
number.
Among the documents submitted to the
grand jury WAS pamphlet containing the
printed arguments Of counsel for complain
ants and defendants, heard by District At.
torney Fellows with closed doors, about
the first OF this month, when con-
siderlng the question whether OF not
to lay the matter before the grand
jury This was given to the press last
night Edward L. Andrews, who pre-
scented the case on behalf Of the complain
ants, said: 1.-THE essential attributes Of
the case do not differ from IN ordinary
case Of embezzlement There is the same
entrusting Of property, the same appropri-
alton OF it, the same discovery Of the Sc
creting, the same demand and the Same
withholding OF the embezzlement property
that ensues In an ordinary case where an
employe takes what is entrusted to him by
an employer. The only difference" he con-
tinued, (which the case presented from
that Of IN ordinary embezzlement was that
1t was done under the apparent forms Of
law, one Of the courts Of this State being
made 10 become On unwilling participant in
their acts"
Artemus II. Holmes, in behalf Of the re-
spondents, argued that there was no GRIM
inality in the proceedings nor were they
carried on in secrecy. All the proceedings
were reported to the Secretary Of the In
terror in 1850. and subsequently presented
in o report to Congress. The mortgage
under which Messrs. Gould and Sage wero
appointed trustees contained clauses which
could very properly be construed so as to
allow the release Of the Denver Pacific
stock.
John F. Dillon, in behalf of the respond
ents, contended that the decree OF the Su-
preme Court OF New York was valid and
properly obtained. The only persons, il
there were any living souls who could make
complaint Of this consolidation, would be
the original Union Pacific shareholders.
The purpose OF the consolidation was not
10 pass the trust property to the debtor
company in order that the company might
Immediately hand it over to Messrs. Gould
and Sage, but 10 restore the property TO the
debtor company in order that through it
the consoli dated company might have the
means of purchasing, as it did purchase,
properties necessary to protect itself from
competition and to promote its interests
and those Of its bondholders. The laws Of
limitation dcbarred all criminal proceed
ings.
W. Bourke Cochran next spoke in oppo-
sition to the complaint being received, con-
tending III An elaborate argument that the
prosecution had been barred by the lapse
time.
Mr.. Andrews closed the hearings with an
argument and citations to show that the
statute Of limitations did not apply under
such circumstances.