The Birmingham age-herald., 1904-03-24

to Birmingham is l5 cents per lO0 pounds and flour rate r cents per 100 pounds,
 showing a reduction of 8 cents per 100 pounds in each commodity.
 also stated that an investigation of
 this matter was brought about at your reouest-you being at that time a com petitor of Mir Conner in the Birmingham market and you having complained to our Birmingham representative that MT. Conner was unable to undersell you In
 that market My understanding is that you stated at that time that you could
 buy flour as cheap as MT Conner could, but that for some reason you were not able to sell it as cheap as he, and that you asked the representative of the Iouis- vile and Nashville Railroad company 10 make an investigation. Such an investisa-
 tion was made, and developed the facts as set forth above. l further stated that these irregular shipments were continued over a period of several months before they were discovered by the Louisville and Nashville Railroad company. until the undercharges amounted to $l29s6, and that all these irregular shipments were | billed to MT B. B. Conner or his Bir- | minohann mills "colect." and that MT
 P .P, c0MFR OR THE BIRMINGHAM | MILLS PAID THE FREIGHT ON SAID | SHIPMENTS AT THE MEAL RATE, when the shipments were in fact FLOUR. I had no information with reference to
 whether the flour was sold delivered in | Birmingham or not. The positive inIor-
 nation I have, however, is that 1t vas
 loaded in MEAL SACkSF | RN lSli ED I5l 1 MIR CONFER AND BEARING HIS | NAME AND BRAND as above described; ! ana thai npon the assumption that 1t was ! MEAL, TT WAS so BILLED BY THIS CoNTPANYas AGENT. and that the
 BIIIs OF. LAD1NG ISSUED FOR THE
 SEVERAL SHIPMENTS describe the
 contents of the sevral cars as Meal ana 1 that our investigation deVlopea the lael 1 that these several cars did Not eohialn | MEAL hut that they contained FLOUR IN MEAL. SACKS, and MT. Conner accept | ed said shinments as MEAL and paid the MEAL rate of freight at that time on ! the same. ,..f,.,,,,7
 have also stated that l was informed
 that about that time MT. B. E. eonef
 made a boast that he lntehueu to eon'i0' inc flour market of Birmingham.
 Now with regard to the fifth paragraph
 of vour letter. in which you state in e1-
 fect that MT. Conner showed them, q
 sunnose YOU mean the Louisville and
 Nashville representative who inVesiga- ted the matter at the time ana eellee'eo | the undercharge of $l29S6 telegranns
 purchasing the flour, his invoices show ing that the miller in Tennessee got the benefit of cents per barrel Tn ifelghe
 (you mean cents per lOo pouhus,. UT cents ner barreD. "and further told the {. T ,o,,isvilIe and Nashville representative
 that he owed the miller Tor ear or
 flour. and if he desired it would pay them the 1 cents per barrel" (you mean l,per 100 pounds) Ion all shipments and charge back to shipper, which ne plai and with regard to the next paragraph
 of your letter in which you state in effect
 MT. Conner took the pains to show the
 representative of the Louisville and Nash vile Railroad company in Birmingham' copy of his letter." etc, as tending to establish that ''he reaped no benefit by
 the false billing, and had no interest III it." desire to say
 I have, since the receipt of your let
 ter. had a conversation over the long
 distance telephone with MT. 10. A. de- l Funiak, the Birmingham representative
 of the Louisville and Nashville Railroad | company, above referred to, which con 1 versation develops the fact that MT, E. l B. Conner did NOT show MT. deFuniak
 any telegram with reference to the pur- | chase of this flour, nor any invoices show | ing that the miller in Tennessee received
 the benefit of the cents per 100 pounds, and MT. Conner did NOT tell MT de- 1 Funiax that he (Comer) owed the miller | in Tennessee for a car of flour, nor that | If he desired it, he would pay the cents
 per 100 pounds. and charge 1t back to
 the shipper, etc. Neither did MT Conner | show the Louisville and Nashville repre-
 sentative in Birmingham, copy of
 letter in which it was shown that he | (Comer) charged back to the shipper in
 Tennessee. the amount of the underehage
 paid by Mir Conner to Mir. deFuniak for
 the Louisville and Nashville Railroad
 company.
 | My information is that Mir. Conner has never, up to this date, explained any of these transactions to MT. F. A. deFuniak
 and the only effort at explanation l have
 ever heard offered was a communication
 from Mir. Conner some time after these
 irregular shipments had been detected
 (and the amount of the irregularity, viz, l $129 S6 collected), addressed to MT. C. E. Compton, who was at that time general | freight agent of the Louisville and Nash | vile railroad office at Louisville, Ky, which fell very far short of a satisfac- | tory explanation, and did not deny re- | sponsiblity for this manipulation On
 the other hand, he admits that the numer-
 ous shipments were irregular. The only
 thing he does deny in this letter was
 that the irregular shipments were of any
 benefit to him or designed to be-
 In this you will note, he speaks of de sign" I am glad he used this term be-
 cause it opens up the thought that if he
 was not the beneficiary. these irregular shipments must have been designed for
 some ones benefit The question now is,
 who was the beneficiary? Of this you,
 at that time being his competitor and
 being undersold In the flour market of | Birmingham by MT. B. B. Conner, was
 better able to judge than l am. And if
 you were not suffering by some irregular
 ity why did you complain to Mir. deFuniak
 that Mir Conner was able to undersell you
 in the Birmingham flour market? In fur
 ther confirmation that MT. Conner does
 not deny that these shipments from MT.
 Hunters mill at Carter's Creek, Tenn, some 12 years ago, were not irregular Is borne out by the fact that in a letter
 addressed to me by MT Conner dated Bir-
 mingham, March F, 1904 he made use of | the following.
 "The entire correspondence in this mat
 ter was referred to Mr. deFuniak and of
 his own Knowledge he can say that 1 had no interest or benefit from this ire
 guar shipment"
 You will note that MT. deFuniak in second paragraph above makes full de-
 nial with reference to telegrams, invoices
 and letters, and he advises me today over
 the long distance telephone that he can
 not say of his own knowledge that MT Conner had no interest or benefit from
 these irregular shipments, on the other
 hand he is inclined to believe that Mir. Conner did have some pecuniary interest, either directly or indirectly
 You win further note from MT. Comer's
 quotation of March 12th that he does not deny that the shipments in question were fof1 fa hnnxr ho