St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-12-01
USED MUCH MONEY.
Important Testimony Given Be-
fore the Panama Canal Investi-
eating Committee.
Baron dc Reinach Receives Large
Sums From the Canal Com
panY.

PARIS. Nov: 30.-The Panama canal
investigating commission today called
Nj. Fleury, auditor in bankruptcy, to
give testimony as to how the money OF
the company had been expended, but
he refused the desired Informs
ton. The committee then heard
the evidence of NJ. Rossignol, M.
Fleury's predecessor. Nj. RoSsignol
confirms the statement that Baron de
Reinach had received 100000 francs
from the Panama Canal company, OF
which amount 100000 trans had been
described as used for advertising. NJ.
Boudet, former secretary OF the
Panama company, also confirmed the
statement of NJ. Rossignol.
NJ. There, manager of a CoullsSe
firm, testified that Baron de Reinach
had paid ZOO. 900 francs into the firm S
account in the Bank of France, and that
on that security the firm had issued
twenty-Seven checks. Witness refused
to say, however, to whom the checks
were made payable. The committee re-
quested NJ. Ricard, minister OF Justice.
to have the checks seized. M. Ricard
promised to comply.
Today's session. especially in view Of
as the most important yet held by the
committee. The public prosecutor has
written to NJ. BrissOn protesting against
the committeels-iuterf in judicial
matters. The magistrates are also In
sdignant at the committees assumption
of judicial functions.
Relatives of Baran Reinach while OPP
posed to the disturbance OF his body,
will, it is said, not offer any veXatiouS
resistance to the authorities, should an
autopsy be determined upon. His
friends claim, however, that even if poi
son should be discovered, it would prove
nothing, owing to the baron's habit of
experimenting with pOisons. What the
public is most interested in are the bar
on'S papers, some of which, it is said,
have disappeared, and which would be
highly valuable, if reports are true, in
showing where much of the money
went and if it was expended in peculiar
ways for the Panama canal.
There is no doubt that scores of depu-
ties are trembling with fear Of expos
ure, and all of these voted for the over
throw Of the government III order, II
possible, to cover up their tracks in the
ensuing excitement. The supporters of
the new Panama company are also
strongly opposed to the prosecution. Nj.
Monchicourt, the judicial liquidator
of the Panama canal company,
is reported to have declared
that he has nothing to do with
the prosecution OF the directors. In his
opinion such action was detrimental
to the reconstruction of the company,
inasmuch as the public will only look
at the faults committed, losing sight al
together of the efforts by which it has
been sought to reSuSticate the scheme
with reference to the reported prolOng-
alton of the period of the company's
concession.
Notwithstanding the sympathy of
many with NJ. De LesSeps, public ODin-
ion throughout France is in favor OF the
action of the government against NJ. DE
Lesseps and his associates in the Pan
anna enterprise. Even those who do not
doubt his good faith or honesty say that
he carried his optimism too far, and led
them astray. 1t was he, they add. and
he alone, who induced them to invest
their hard-earned savings under the
pretension that the Panama would out
do the Suez canal. and insure them and
their families large fortunes. This de-
ception, however unintentional as 1t
may have been, they cannot forgive,
and although since the final collapse of
the undertaking, now three years ago,
still they demand that justice shall be
dealt out to all parties guilty of irregu-
laritieS.