The San Francisco call., 1895-11-17
The Grand Jury to Make an In.
vestigation of the Serious
Charge.
HOW THE MONEY WAS PAID
Sworn Statements of the Dairymar
Will Be Compared With His
Oral Version.

The much-talked-of Sanders Tobin- Rood
bribery case is to be thoroughly ventilated
by the Grand Jury. This is the story as
published in THE CALL of an alleged at
TEN pt to bribe Milk Inspector Dockery.
The positive refusal of Dairyman
Sanders to take any personal action in the
matter has aroused no end of unfavorable
comment. Sanders has claimed that he
fear that gentleman would retaliate in a
civil action.
The case is to be investigated by the
Grand Jury and the evidence that will be
considered by that body is now in posses
sion OF the secretary. 1t remains for the
Grand Jury to determine as far as con-
Germs Mr.. Dockery in the matter of at
tempted bribery, the individual and col
lective liability of Sanders, Tobin and
Rood. The sworn statement of Sanders,
which is to be considered by the Grand
Jury in connection with his verbal state
ment to them, is in part as follows:
On October 19 sample of milk was taken
from my wagon by Milk Inspector Dockery, at
the St. Nicholas Hotel, and part OF the sample
was sealed and sent back with the driver to
me. A few days later l called at the City Hall
to see from the Board of Health how my milk
tested. Inquired at the office if they knew,
and they told me that they did not know, but
that they would have to see Mr.. Dockery and
went out into the hallway to find Mr.. Dockery,
but did not see him. While in the hall Mr..
Rood came up to me and said, 81 see Mr..
Dockery has got at one of your wagons"
said eyes, but do not know how the milk
tested y
He then said, 81 will take you to man who
is great friend of Mr.. Dockery, and who can
fix this matter for you" He then took me to a
party who has an Office near the City Hall,
whom ! recognized as Mr.. Tobin, law
1 told Mr.. Tobin that sample of milk had
been taken by Mr.. Dockery, and was afraid
| that might not get justice in the matter and
get published in the papers, all of which would
hurt my business. Mr.. Tobin then said that
Mr.. Dockery was friend of his and that for
500 he could fix the matter satisfactorily SO
that it would not get in the papers, and fur
ther that he would attend to it right away.
then left his office, but did not pay him any
money at that time. A few days later my son
told me that he had been al my Office while
was away and wanted the money. A few days
after that he called again while was away
and left note saying that II did not call at
his office that day and pay the money hewould
not guarantee TO keep it out OF the papers
Thinking that he really had this power over
Mr.. Dockery, as up to this time there had been
no mention in the papers, and sooner than risk
further trouble went up to his office and paid
the $50 agreed upon. The next morning, Octo-
Der 80, was advertised in the paper, and SO
thought this rather strange. L then called on
Mr.. Dockery for an explanation and found out
that it was a scheme to extort money from me.
This interesting document, which is
likely to cut quite figure in the forth
coming investigation, is duly sworn and
subscribed to before Adele L. Ballou, No
vember 8. Attached to it is the note from
Tobin. requesting that Sanders call and
pay the money agreed on, and also re-
| ceipt for the same.
| The witnesses to be called in the case
are: Inspector Dockery, DR.. E. J. Greedy,
]. Sanders Attorney Tobin and III. A.
Rood.