The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-06-13
A LETTER SHIEL SIGNED
MR.. RAUH SUBMITS 1T IN THE STOCK
YARDS CONTROVERSY.
Agreement for 100000 Not TO Build
Y~ards-Mr. Erwin's State
ment.


Stock Yards Company, last night gave out
a statement in answer to Messrs. Erwin
ana Shiel in reference to a subject that is
being given much publicity these days. 1T
IS not my desire to carry on a newspaper
controversy" said Mr.. Rauh, but in JUS
ice to my company / deem 1t proper TO
make the following statement:
In his statement In the Journal Mr..
Erwin Is reported as saying the old COM
ing to worry US into selling, but we are not
70 De bought i wish to state most en-
Pnaucally that there is not and never was
Sny desire on the part Of the Union Stock
Yards Company to buy out the new COM
pShy or the promoters of IL, and I'm view OF
@hat mas been said by Mr.. Erwin and Mr..
IsctS concerning the proposition made by
~. II. Shiel, who claimed TO be acting for
fe Iredi n a fba nls associates, to which l re,
saturdays Sentinel. In the Sentinel Of Feb.
"a reference was made TO a new stock yards
Humphrey with It.. Mr.. Fred +. Squire is
treasurer and Mr.. +. Il. Humphrey Is traffic
manager Of John p. Squire < Co, of Bos-
me and asked me about the matter. / told
MN L knew nothing about IL. He then
ung Information on the subject and 1 said
10 MIN that IL Mr.. Squire was interested he
could likely get from him. With
a view of advising myself whether there
was any foundation for the published state
ment, and while the reporter was still I'm
my ONCE, 1 called up by telephone at Chi
Saso DIR. Fred +. Squire, of John L. Squire
* Co, OF Boston, and told him of the pub
nshed statement In the Sentinel, of the re-
porters call and asked him whether there
Was any foundation for the statement. In
answer to this he asked me to tell him all
tnere was In the published statement. /
told him 1t was too long to repeat over the
telephone at that time. He then asked me
70 mail him a copy of the Sentinel contain
ing the statement. which L did on that day.
asked when he would be In indianapolis,
as L would like TO have a talk with him.
He said he did not know when he would be
mere, but would write me. He brought the
old not care to talk about the matter over
the telephone. The following morning / re-
ceived from Mr.. Squire by special delivery
the following letter, dated Chicago, Feb. "a,
paper Of John +. Squire & CO.: %
My Dear Sir-Referring to our CONVEX
sation by telephone this morning. As per
your request 1 would be pleased TO meet
you at any time or place, preferably at Mr..
+ r. Humphreys Chicago Office, No. 6s
Rialto Building, next Monday morning. If,
however, your object is to consult with me
In regard to indianapolis matters / must re-
yersy, as both Mr.. Humphrey and myself
nave placed the matter in the hands of Mr..
X r. Shiel. Kindly wire me at above ad-
II made no answer to this letter, The
same day that it was received r. r. Shiel
ADVISED me that he. too. had received by
NAAfSt q NH O4dLI
authorizing him to act for him. At this
point L may add that Mr.. Shiel had some
differences with the commission men at the
stock yards. with which my company had
nothing to do, but because of which he
(ShieD brought suit against my company to
compel the opening OF the scales at the
IN the morning. This is the only litigation
between Mr.. Shiel and my company.
Before this talk with Mr.. Squire over
the telephone a meeting had been arranged |
for Saturday, Feb. 25, at the Denison Ho-
tel. between Mr.. Shiel and Mr.. Hanson, Col.
part OF ascertaining and putting in SUBJ
stantial form what Mr.. Shiel wanted. This
meeting was held at the Denison Hotel at
gentlemen named being present. At this
meeting, in talking with Mr.. Shiel about the
matt matter Than ne t5 Saia d nat there ~ was Ss c s0m,sGthindg
and that there were other parties interest
ed, and he then began to talk about the new
finally asked what he wanted he made the
statement embodied in the following COM |
munication TO the Belt Railroad and Stock
Yards Company, signed by him and delivered
10 me at the time. Ii was written by me at
Mr.. Shells dictation in the presence OF Col.
Downing and Mr., Hanson. and was signed
on a Denison House letter head and was as
follows: In consideration of 500 600 to be paid
by the Belt Railroad 4 Stock Yards Co, to
one year, $4,000 In two years and $4,000 in
three years, all different payments TO bear
for himself and his associates,
agree not to build or interest themselves
in any stock yards in the State OF Indiana,
except Lake county,, and further agree to use
all their efforts in advancing the interests
of the Belt Railroad and Stock Yards Co., and
further agree that he will maintain a market
TO the Chicago stockyards' prices on hogs.
This proposition and agreement TO hold good
and binding until the 18th day or March; 1929
"At this meeting Mr.. Shiel stated In his
very positive way that this proposition was
final, and that because Of the absence Of
one of his associates. Mr.. Erwin, who was
made in its terms. The proposition, which
speaks for itself, was rejected"
MR. ERwIN'S REPLY.
Mr.. u. p. Erwin was shown the statement
made by Mr.. Rauh last night and concern
ing 1t he said: with reference to the letter
signed by Fred p. Squire, I have satisfied
myself that 1t referred TO a question Of rep
in the old stockyards by the firm
of Squire & Co. I think the old company
had assured Squire & Co. that IL they would
send a man to the yards to buy stock in
stead of doing it through Shiel & Co, it
would be entirely satisfactory. The stock
yards company at first demurred to Squire
& Co. buying any hogs Of Shiel & Co., but
afterward consented to their buying from
whom they pleased. When Squire & Co. sent
their representative into the yards they
IN GlCNhg ol0o AAP JILL 4
to much discrimination against Shiel & Co., |
going so far as to refuse TO sell them hogs |
unless they would refuse TO buy of Shiel.
This Squire & CO. declined to DO and with
drew their man and renewed their contract
with Shiel &c Co. to represent them. The
result OF this episode was the occasion of
the letter signed by Fred p. Squire, which
Mr.. Rauh sets out in his statement. 1t is my
opinion that 1t refers entirely to the trans
action OF their business with the old stock
yards and not to any new stockyards scheme
as they would try TO make 1t appear.
with reference to the letter dated at the |
Denison and signed by r. r. Shiel, / have
been shown the original of that letter and
have been assured that IL is in the hand
writing of Mr.. Rauh. / am also assured |
that the proposition signed by Mr.. Shiel |
was first written by Mr.. Rauh and after
ward typewriter for Mr.. Shiel's signature. |
/ have every reason 10 believe that these
negotiations, so far as Mr.. Shiel was con-
cerned. were entirely in the interests OF
himself, his partners in his firm and his
attorneys and his advisers. i do not be-
lieve that Mr.. Shiel used my name at any
time in any of the troubles he has had
with the old stock yards company. With
reference to all this matter L believe that |
Mr.. Shiel is the victim OF a conspiracy and |
that he will be able at the proper time in
court to get justice. However. / wish TO
publicly disclaim having any connection
whatever with Mr.. Shiel in his quarrel with |
Mt. Rauh. Neither have l any quarrel with