The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-03-01

a .cinch' on that deal?'
II dent know what you mean,' retoTted
kind of language
Mr.. Frenzel. did you recommend the
purchase of that property for s60,ooo?''
Yes, sir. 1 advised Mr.. MartindaIe to
take it,
did you know that there was public
feeling against the purchaser?
No; except what was in the newspapers.
don't pay attention to the newspapers
do you make it practice to pay no
II do
Let me ask you il you yourself would
Would you have paid $4,000 for itg'
IF you thought it was a good invest
m l., why didn't you keep the snap to
don't understand YOU
Never mind that. Can you tell the COM
Board or of any brides having been offered
70 q. yo ~ or to any one else!
Mr.. Frenzel was excused at 10 o'clock.
John 5. Spann, one Of the oldest real
estate dealers in the city, testified before
ae o sSe last the RTee s of s
had known Of the Ricketts, prop
erty for many years, He would estimate
had never known of Pennsylvania-street
property. selling for $500 a foot before The
Sein qms he sad for sae and
business portion of the city than the Rick
etts property. He regarded the purchase OF
the property by the School Board as an
william H English was called to testify
In the same line. He was asked to put an
opinion the dwellings and grounds were
worth from $4,000 to $4,000.
TILT WITH ATTORNEY DRYER.
AT 1880 o'clock a number of real-estate
men We're put on the stand to refute the
testimony adduced by the committee as to
the probable value of the Ricketts, property
These witnesses were brought forward by
attorney Dryer, who represents the School
Board. Previous to the introduction of this
testimony a heated argument was INDUCED
in by Chairman Moore, Of the committee,
and attorney Dryer. Both men became
very angry, and Chairman Moore was par
ticularly indignant The dialogue was
brought out when the attorney offered to
boards actions. Chairman Moore objected,
because the attorney had failed to file
briefs;
dence," said the chairman, because Mr..
Dryer has failed to file briefs showing what
"Weil then, Il you don't do that" holly
replied the attorney, Il want the record to
show that we have offered to introduce
s"rhe record will show nothing Of the
kind" was the angry Interpolation of the
chairman.
well, can't see why it should not"
ST say that the record will not show IT,
again broke in the chairman. There was a
menancing CLEAN in his black eyes as he
went on: II want you to understand that
this Is not court, Mr.. Dryer, but an inves-
tigation. We have not asked you to come
here, and have not invited your witnesses.
If Mr.. Loeper is here and wants to make
an explanation this committee will hear
him. Now, I don't propose to argue this
matter with you any longer, Mr.. Dryer.
think you fully understand just what
mean, and think you understood what our
practice was to be at the outset.
81 did not understand anything or the
kind, retorted Attorney Dryer.
well, then, all can say Is that your
understanding is limited" was the reply OF
the chairman
"Oh, well, if nothing else will do you, here
are the Briefs" snapped the attorney, draw
ing document from his pocket and tossing
it over toward the table. 1t contained the
names of the witnesses the attorney desired
examined and the queries to be put to them.
Cross-examination was not permitted.
Charles E. Coffin was put on the stand
by the committee as a witness for the
board Chairman Moore conducting the ex-
animation. He said that in 1893 he approved
an ADVERTISEMENT of the Ricketts, property
at 100000. Volney T. Malott, banker, was
acquainted with the value of real estate in
Indianapolis. He considered the property in
question worth $4,000. James Cruise testi-
praisement of the Ricketts, real estate. His
estimate was $4,000 Mr.. Cruise did not be-
lieve that the property could have been sold
for that sum in cash.
The COMMITTEES adjourned at IL o'clock, but
will reconvene tonight.