The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1903-01-27
A Damaging Admission Wrung from
the Coe Commission Companys
Star Witness.
He Is Examined in Court in Adj
vance Of Geo. J. Hammond's
Trial. -,
Hammond's Petition May Indicate
That He Will Start Suit
-. Himself. .

Foundations for what promises to fur
nish sensational and extensive litigation
were laid this morning in the campaign
against the bucket shop as represented
here by the Coe Commission company, OF
which George J.. Hammond is the head.
The deposition Of L. A. Gilmore. a Chica-'
go attorney, was taken before Judge Ell
lott and the testimony threw some inter-
estlng side lights on the situa ton. In
cidentally, Gilmore, who came here in the
interests Of Hammond, was obliged to de-
fend himself against searching inquiry.
When the morning session ended he had
admitted having served a term in prison
in Missouri, for the crime of embeZZle-
ment This revelation in connection with
the witness was somewhat disconcerting.
The petition asking that the deposition
might be taken and the testimony thus
perpetuared alleges that within the last
year the Coe Commission company's busi-
ness has been seriously interfered with
and interrupted by the cutting Of wires
| and the diverting of electric currents from
their proper channels and also by the
prosecution of false and frivolous charges
| against the officers Of the company. The
chamber of commerce, Watson & Co.,
Van Dusen Harrington company, Gus
| tave F. Eve, A. E. Tyler and Stanley
Washburr are named in the petition in
connection with these acts.
! No pending suit for litigation is men
! toned in the petition but it is naturally
supposed that Frank r. Booth, attorney
| for George j. Hammond. wants Gilnlore's
| testimony IS part of the defense of his
client who will within a few days be tried
on the charge Of grand larceny. General
George P. Wilson, Judge M. B. Koon and
H. V. Mercer appeared on behalf. of the
Chamber of Commerce. .E.
The witness, L. A Gilmore, is attorney
for Mrs. Mary p BonneII who lost $4o,-
! 600 through operations Of the Combination
Of ofr1 1,iol,
| Mr.. Hammond was manager. In this way
he became acquainted: with the present
Coe Commission company difficulties in
/ Minneapolis and was enabled to throw
some light on the proceedings. ~"a.,"-- =
. Gilmore testified on direct examination
that Minneapolis newspaper man sup
posed to be connected with the Cham
Der Of Commerce visited him in Chicago
some little time ago and there held sew
eral conferences with him concerning the
cases against Hammond. ~
HE told me-, said the witness, that
1.-THE :Chanlber of C Commerce wanted to get
rid of Hammond. who was. running a
4 bucketshop I'm Minneapolis, that he was
held to the grand jury in the charge OF
+, grand larceny but that 2rHge ease did not
seem to be very strong and that they
wanted a warrant sworn out against him
in Chicago so that he might be arrested
in Minneapolis and held for eXtradition in
case the grand jury failed to bring an in
tdictment against him. r.: -
IT told him that I was not interested
in criminally prosecuting Hammond;
that I wanted to get my clients money
back and would be satisfied with that.
I refused to give the name of my client.
although he repeatedly urged me to do
SOL .,--rr., '
This was the main point OF Gilmore $
testimony in regard to the transaction.
Letters and kilograms were introduced to
show the evident interest taken by the
Chamber of Commerce representatives in
the matter of the Chicago charges against
Hammond ...-.
5 The attorneys for the chamber sub
> jected the witness to severe cross
animation and secured many admissions
, from him which he made with evident
: reluctance and which tend to impair his
l credibility. Gilmore was forced to adj
NIT that he had been convicted of en-
bezzlement and sentenced to the state
I penitentfary of Missouri, and that he
was associated with men whose actions
were not altogether proper at all times.