The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-08-13

declined until he paid back what he had
overcharged her, as she knew the over
charges had been going on a long time.
Asked how she knew IL. she said she
inquired of some of the employees Of
Kreig's market
J. T.. Collins testified to being present
on % occasions when Miss Maggie
weighed her meat. He noted the short
ages each time on tn e bill rendered
with the order of meat. The witness
figured up the totals of Kreig's bills and
what they should have been and found
a total shortage of S21.77 for 80 days.
There was always a discrepancy on ali
the occasions on which the witness
witnessed the weighing of the meat.
The shortages were figured on the basis
OF the price of meats agreed apo be-
tween the Maggie sisters and the defend
ant and the amounts ordered.
r. j. Walker, city inspector of
weights and measures. testified TO test
ing the scales used by the Maggie sisters
on the I'd of July and found them cor
rect.
Mrs. I. Lindsey. cook for the Maggie
sisters. testified to being present at the
weighing of the meat on several occa-
sions. he 18th of u IN included. 1t
was never of correct weight.
Dan Jaege was also present when
the meat was weighed by the Maggie sis
tiers. The weighing was always cor
rectly done and there was always a dis
crepancy between the weights and the
amount charged for. The butchers
weight was marked on some occasions
with regard to orders of pork and NUT
ton. and these varied also.
Joseph NeSser. formerly an employe
of the defendant, testified that he was
in the habit of putting up the steak
for the Nagle of a morning.
The meat was not charged up by Kreig
in accordance with the price agreed on
between him and the Nagles. There
would always be a discrepancy in
Kreig's favor. The overcharges would
run from % to so cents. Every time
witness noticed the bills he observed
an overcharge. He had noticed the
same thing with regard to other Gus
toners.
The witness was aware there was a
fixed price the Maggie sisters were
charged for meats.
John Jehnke, an employe of the de-
PENDANT, was next called. He testified
very reluctantly. Under questioning
by Mr.. Connolly he old of a case i'm
which a leg of mutton had been sent
to the restaurant. The Nagles thought
too much a been charged. and when
the witness communicated the fact to
NNANAS A1 ooAo tAdN was al 4 H. that
he would make it right.
Did you not state to me-" said Mr..
Connolly, that when you told Kreig
the Nagle sisters thought they ought
TO get the leg of mutton cheaper, he
replied telling o to let them have 1t
at their price and add on a couple of
~pounds?"
The witness admitted he had made
such a statement.
Mr.. Connolly ~oun the close of
the states case and the defendant was
put on the stand. He confined himself
to a general denial of the allegations
OF the witnesses for the state and said
If there had been any shortage it had
been done through error. What APP
peared like overcharges. he said. were
due to his having raised the price of
meat during July, of which h gave
the Nagle sisters notice as per agree
ment. He presented his books to show
the entry with reference to meat pur-
chased on the 29th of June. the date
specified in the complaint, and in doing
so opening a damaging loophole for the
prosecution. On cross-examination Mr..
Connolly questioned the witness with
reference to other entries, and brought
out the fact that on a certain date an
order amounting to $3.50 had been
charged $3.50 in the books, while to the
bill to the Maggie sisters another dollar
had been added, making ii 1870. The
book showed an alteration of the entry
to the proper amount, 50 80, and no
witness explained that an error had
been made.
In rebuttal. the Misses Mile and Jen-
ME Maggie and Mrs. Lindsey were called
and stated that Kreig never gave any
notice of raising his prices during July
nor were they raised.
After argument by counsel, which
was lengthy, the case was given to
the jury and a verdict was returned in
a few minutes finding the defendant
guilty n fixing his punishment at
$500 fine and six months imprisonment.
Mr.. Leonard gave notice of appeal. and
pending the filing Of a bond the defend
ant was allowed his liberty on his own
recognizance.