New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-06-09
TWO INNOCENT PURCHASERS
ACQUITTED OF JOINING IN THE OLD
SHOE CONSPIRACY"

THE GOODS WE'RE SOLD AT SECRET SACRIFICE
AID SHIPPED OUT OF THE CREDITORS WAY.
BUT THESE BUYERS WERE not
pRIvY TO THE FRAUD
Two OF the men implicated in the "old shoe con-
spiracy." which has received much advertising IN
The newspapers in the last two years. were tried
and acquitted yesterday in the County Court before
Judee Hurd and a Jury They were Joseph Denp-
sev and Thomas F. IcKay. and the charge against
them was that they fraudulently removed property
with intent 10 defraud creditors and prevent a
levy.
In 1894 James F. Wilson kept a shoe store al NO
al Nvrtle-aye He put $1,000 worth OF SHOES IN
IN. place most OF which he go, on credit from shoe
e-,na all over the country. The charge against
Demp,ey and Mckay was that they bought large
quantity Of these goods at much less thah the
market prices, and took them away from wilson y
store knowing the manner In when ne ha" o0-
tanned them. The defence was that the SHOES were
purchased In legitimate way anu III '"o ''e"
course OF business.
Nilson was the first witness called by the prose
cution He testified that he had been IN the JAIL
since May g. 1895. when he pleaded guilty 10 an
Indictment charging him with defrauding his cred
itors He told OF the incidents OF the SAFE OF the
goods I'm his store 10 the Defendants
Under cross-examinatio ton by Charles j. Patterson
u,bo with Jere A. Weinberg. appeared for the
attendants the witness admitted that he and MS
clerk Charles Siebrdge. had selected the SHOES 10
be sent 10 the defendants while they were not
there He said that Siebridge first suggested inc
scheme TO him, and that they acted together u
defraud their creditors. He gave Sebridge ~" TOT
what he did Wilson said that he had cleared ~"
nv the transaction. Siebrdge never came 10 see
h,,o IN the tail and he never implicated him In the
transaction before - "a o,sesad
,ha, he and Wilson had combined 10 defrauh VII
sons creditors He admitted 'ha' he hau ~ less
than their value. The idea, as he uilue Stoou 49,
was that Wilson was 70 make genera a arsn
nent win Wilson ne did not know that ne was
liable 10 criminal prosecution Wnen ne ea i,nr
raj he went to Hastings & Gleason, me a't1 or,
news for Wilson's creditors. and 'on mem h t're
whole truth in the matter. they empioyea ni,
W. 90, evidence In the case. and told MN ne woui
~ , - nor cent of the goods recovered. Ne sara
also that Mr. Gleason employed MN !" u'''O
ca tsTnen YOU were willing 10 be dishonest IL you
we're "1 not crimnally liable? asked Mr. Patterson
in cross EXAMINATION. ,.ss
.oTben YOU do not claim to be an honest man
.Iion DO you make that outY'
IL 10, rou Vim try honesty for change!
~ ritness said that he had never been arres'ei,
~, ,hot he was told that II he did what he could
TO- convict the men indicted ne woun "o' oe P'o''
cu Meo the case was closed Mr.. Patterson moved
Wh zen Court direct verdict for Dempsey ami Me;
Kay the ground tnat n Else Than an honest
Una, iav TSev could not be supposed to know that
Wilson had not en 'n to buy where they
rroud buy the cheapest Judge huTu s'a M, ri te
motion despite the objections OF Assna AZ
attnyney Niles, and the defendants were u'S-
Tbee Judge Hurd called Wilson upstairs ana
I0is MN ma nea MOI explained Indictments In
against Jacob Strauss. Henry Harrison ana An'ph