The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1903-06-17
Prosecution Directed Against M. s.
Nfeyberg and Samuel Click by
Local Railroads.
TICKETS USED IN EVIDENCE
EMPLOYEES OF RAILROADS CLAIM
THEY WE'RE CHANGED.
Big Four Agent at Anderson ON the
Stand-Statement Made by Broker
A. L. Messing.

The trial of NJ. s. Meyberg and Samuel
Click. ticket brokers, charged with uttering
forged and fraudulent railroad tickets and
passes, was continued before Judge Whal-
lon, of the City Police Court yesterday
afternoon. and John s. Duncan, attorney for
the prosecution. feels confident of binding
the men over to the grand jury.
-Four witnesses for the prosecution were
placed on the stand and their testimony
occupied the time of the. court until 5
o'clock, when the hearing was adjourned
until 2 o'clock this afternoon.
A great many tickets purporting to have
been changed and altered were introduced
as evidence against the defendant brokers
and among them were several samples of
what is termed 'split tickets" by those
familiar with ticket frauds. A split ticket
is one which has been remodeled by cut
ting the face from an unused ticket and
pasting it over the cancellation mark in
such a manner as to retain the stamp of
the railroad on the back. leaving the face
of the ticket apparently unused. Several
tickets were introduced which apparently
had been changed and which, 1t is claimed,
were bought from the Meyberg agency
John Ham, baggageman for the Big Four
Railroad testified that he had not checked
baggage on one of the tickets which ap-
peared to have been punched by an instru-
ment making a similar mark to the one
used by him, and it is claimed by the prose-
cution that the "B. c." mark. or baggage
cover the cancellation mark of the con-
ductor who raised or honored the ticket
Furgeson, ticket agent of the Big Four
Railroad at Anderson, testified as to the
date of sale of a series of tickets pre-
sented to the court and to the date of issue
and expiration which he stamped on the
backs of the tickets at the time of the
sale.
DATES CHANGED.
According to the testimony of the An
derson man the dates on the backs of two
or more of the tickets in question were
changed by some person other than an
employe of the railroad so they could be
used at date several weeks later than
that allowed by the time limit. The tickets
bearing the changed and altered dates of
expiration and issue were bought by
young man, ii Is said. from the Meyberg
agency, in good faith for passage over the
Big Four Railroad and the alterations
were not detected until the tickets were
turned in TO +. NJ. Brine, ticket account
ant of the Big Four Railroad at Cincinnati.
Mr.. Brine was placed on the stand and
testified as to the date on which the tickets
were used and the train on which the pas
sage was secured, mis- testimony tending TO
show that the tickets, which were issued
in May, were not used until June and that
the conductor of the train on which they
were used had accepted them in good faith
for the passage, not suspecting that the
dates of issue and expiration had been
altered.
Mr. Charles b. Stilz. ticket agent for the
Union Railway Company at the Union Sta
ton, testified to the date of sale and the
date of the expiration of certain tickets
soli In this city. He claimed. from the
records OF the Union Station ticket ONCE
produced In court, that certain dates and
figures had been erased and altered In such