The herald., 1894-08-16
PRICE AS A COLLECTOR.
THE HERMITAGE COMPANY PRO-
DUCES MANY RECEIPTS.
The Smooth Defendant Trying to X,
cape Conviction OF EmbszxIement
by Claiming He Bought
the Goods.

90. g. Price is quite smart young
man. and may spring a technically
which will allow him to slip through
the charge of embezzlement brought
against him by the Hermitage Vine
yard company of this city. Yet even 9
smart young man cannot manipulate
collections, as he was yesterday shown
to have done, without coming uncom
fortably close to the walls of the peni'
Tertiary.
His examination was in progress dur
ing the day before Justice McLain, who
ia sitting for Justice Bartholomew. The
prosecution was conducted by Horace
Bell and the defense by Messrs. Hol.
comb and Moore.
Mr.. Il. Mschris was the principal wit
ness yesterday, his examination taking
up the best part of the day. His testi.
mony consisted in a detailed statement
of the business relations between the
Hermitage company and Price. He
stated that the company now consists Of
himself and P. Darancette, Mr.. Mes
mayer not being now an officer of the
company.
Price entered the employ OF the com
pany in May last. he said, as a solicitor
for business and collector, taking orders
and collecting for them. He had col.
lected during the time he worked
about two and half months-several
hundred dollars, and had paid in some
OF it, 80 far as known now having kept
about $3.50. The goods which he
ordered had been delivered, and he had
collected for it, but had only turned in
a small part of it.
A number of paid bills. receipted for
by Price. were introduced, one at time.
in evidence. Mr.. Machris stated that
making collections and not turning in
the money he went around to the Gus.
TONERS and the receipts in court were
those which he had been able to find 30
far. The witness produced two books,
an order book and small ledger, in
which Prices transactions were kept.
From these and the receipted bills he
testified to various bills of goods ordered
by Price, delivered by the house. and
for which no money had been received,
but the receipts showed Price had been
paid. The amounts ranged from a few
dollars up to as much az 500. On some
small amounts had been paid, and on
others Price had informed his employers
that he had been unable to collect any
thing, although the receipts showed he
had received payment in full.
The line of defense WAS developed to
some extent in the cross discrimination
of Mr.. Machris, when he was asked
about the contract into which the COM
pany entered with Price, and counsel
said they expected to show the defend.
ant had purchased the goods from the
Hermitage company, and II that was 80
he could not be held for their EN- bezzle-
ment, even though he had not paid for
them.
The contract WAS produced by Mr..
Mesnager. 1t showed that the company
agreed to give him. wines, liquors, ETC..
at specified prices, he to receive GER
tain per cent for certain price. He
was to have delivery wagon for use,
and one clause in the contract stated
that Price was responsible for the goods
taken out BY him. 1t was in this clause
that the defense mainly relies to show
that Price bought the goods, although
upon the receipts he signed himself as
| agent.
During the afternoon several OF the
persons who paid money to Price which
he did not turn in were examined.
A new phase was put upon the case
yesterday afternoon when Price swore to
separate complaints in the police court
charging Darancette and Machris of the
Hermitage Vineyard company with sell
ing liquor without a retail license. 1t
looks as though Price is using every pos
sibe means to get even" with the
company who caused his arrest for en-
bezzlement. He also informed against
Darancetts and Mschris. charging them
with using Cancelled stamps contrary to
the revenue law, and which they say
they can easily refute.