Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1904-02-05

taking of money from two banks with
which to purchase a draft to send to
Machen, the amount of the draft being one
half of the amount of a check received from
d. B. Gror and deposited in one of the
banks.
Mr.. Purdy. why didn't you buy the draft
at the bank with which the Croft check was
deposited?"
II don't know" was the answer given by
Mr. Lorenz, unless l wanted to keep the
account at each bank in good condition"
Mr.. Purdy wanted to know why the wit
ness instructed Machen on one occasion to
draw on him for S1,031.
Because I wanted to pay him that
much" stated Mr.. Lorenz. II had learned
that day or two previously Mr.. Croft had
mailed me a check for double that amount"
Inquiry was also made regarding num-
Der of other checks and drafts. the object
of the government being to show that it
was the custom of LorenZ to promptly re-
init to Machen one-half of the checks re-
ceved from d. B. Croft and that very often
the amount of the remittance to Machen
was taken from two banks.
Drafts Of Which There Was No Entry.
After inquiry regarding checks and
drafts had proceeded for forty minutes Mr..
Purdy proved that Mr.. Lorenz had sent
several drafts to Machen of which no
er try was made in his account book.
DO you mean to say" Mr.. Purdy asked.
that you had no understanding with
Machen that you should send him one-half
of each remittance received by you from
the Groffs?"
There was no such understanding. Mr..
LorenZ asserted.
Mr.. Purdy wanted to know why four of
the checks sent to Machen were signed by
Mrs. LorenZ, when the witness had the
right to check against her account The
witness could not give specific reason. He
declared that it was not done for the pur-
pose of concealment, nor were any of his
transactions. Mr.. LorenZ CHANGED to re-
mark that the three banks with which he
had accounts knew that he sent money to
Machen.
But" declared Mr. Purdy, mo bank
knew that you were sending Machen ex-
actly one-half of each remittance you re-
ceived from d. B. Croft
II don't know whether 1t did or not" re-
piled Mr.. Lorenz.
Nor did any bank official know" added
Mr.. Purdy.
Mr.. Lorenz said he did not know regard
ing that, either.
At this point the usual midday recess was
taken.
Continuing the cross-examination of Mr..
LorenZ at the opening of the session of the
court this afternoon, Mr.. Purdy, after a
few preliminary questions, asked:
Did you have any means of knowing
whether or not you were receiving from the
Groffs your full share of the profits de-
rived from the sales of fasteners?"
Il took 1t for granted that they were
straight" explained Mr.. Lorenz.
did you ever examine their accounts?'
persisted Mr.. Purdy.
NO, SIR" was the reply. Il had the
fullest confidence in them"
Beginning to Be Interesting.
Continuing. Mr. Lorenz said he could not
recollect whether he ever told his wife
anything about his transactions with the
Groffs. Then the proceedings became de-
cidedly interesting.
Replying to questions, Mr.. Lorenz ex-
planned that being convinced that the per
secution" of his friend Machen had an
Interior motive behind it, and was not for
the public good he declined to make any
statements to the post office inspectors
when they called to see him at Toledo last
spring.
dicted yourself rather than explain an
innocent transaction commented Mr.
Purdy. who then asked:
You came to Washington in response
to telegram from Machen didn't your
Yes, SIR. admitted Mr.. Lorenz.
Was that visit to this city before or
after the visit of the inspectors to you?"
Mr.. Purdy wanted to know.
II don't remember" declared Mr. Lorenz
Don't you know that it was before?" de-
manded counsel.
ut may have BEEN answered Mr.. Lo-
REM
Later. the witness admitted. he went to
Pittsburg with his attorney to see Machen
Discussion of Remittances.
The government next sought to prove by
| the cross-exa mination of the witness that
! the uniform transmission by him to Machen
of one-h half of the remittances received from
| the Groffs, was not the result of accident
but was in furtheranee of a well-defned
plan scheme. An attempt was made
| to prove this by check to which objection
! was made by the defense. The objection
was sustained because the check offered
actions embraced by the indictment against
| the defendants.
After Mr.. Iorenz had sta ted that the
$4,000 note has not been fully paid: that
! IL was settled last December by the wit
| ness giving Machen another note for 5000,
| the cross-examination closed.
| On redirect examination, conducted by
I the details Of the settlement of the SIS. 600
| note.
| Mr.. Lorenz declared that over half Of his
| remittarces TO Machen were not even an
| proximately oGe-haIf OF the amounts ra-
| ceived from tie GrofYs
!, Both the defense and the government
| seemed loath 20 let go OF Mr.. Lorenz, but
| at a late hour thts afternoon he was per-
mitted to leave the stand.
| She denied having any knowledge what
| ever OF the 9roft fastener transaction
/ The examination OF Mrs. Lorenz had not
been concluded when an adjournment was
! taken until 10 o'clock tomorrow morning.
| 1t is the intention OF Justice Pritchard to
( sit all day tomorrow. notwithstanding it
| viii be Saturday