Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-06-01

been advised not to say anything
What did Attorney kuu1ler say to you
while in the hall on that occasion?" Attor-
ney Worthington desired to know.
Il don't remember. was the answer.
Counsel for the defense commented point
eddy on the alleged fact that Lorenz re-
membered some things very we'll and could
not remember others.
/ The -cross-examinstion was then swerved
to Lorenzs oil business with Machen ana
his business connection with the Groh
brothers.
At this point Maj. Conrad interposed an
objection The government had no desire
to protect IorenZ he said but the Machen-
Lorenz-Groff case certainly should not be
retired now. That would lie. to say the
least a needless consumption of time. ana
the defense had gone on record as pehs
opposed to needlessly consuming Tune
The objection was overruled and Lorenz
was asked if there had been any under
standing between Machen and himself as %
the dividing of money realized from the
Croft contract There had been no such
understanding. the witness declared
why then" Attorney Worth ngton ASK
ed. like flash. did you say that Macheh
told you that your arrangement VIII VII MN
in the Croft case would be all r:sht!
Iorenz insisted that there had been no
understanding with Machen Next me ae-
Tense wanted to know why. In remittns
part of the money he received from the
Groffs to Machen he "spli." his bank trans
actions The eXplanat of the witness
was that he did not know, except as
CARDS certain of the instances. he was oe
sirous that people should not know MS pri-
yate business; and, further. that 1t was
done for the convenience of his seVefai
bank accounts. .
The defense seemed to think that 1t was
very significant that LorenZ was apie "
produce nearly all of the correspondence ne
had received from Crawford, but hao KEEP
nothing received by him from Machen.
Lorenz was required to review his state
ments regarding his coming to this city at
Of MachpO. and of seeing CraW-
ford and entering into the alleged agree
ment with the latter.
The Subject Of Straps.
The examination was turned to the sub
iect of the straps for carriers satchels
Lorenz said he did not manufacture any OF
the straps and never intended to manufac-
ture them The defense pointed out that
in letters from Crawford to Lorenz read
in court, it was assumed that Lorenz was
manufacturing the straps.
II thought that was play CRAWFORD was
making" the witness said.
.You thought he deceivng his com
pany. and you were willing TO assist IL the
deception Attorney Worthlngton re-
marked
During the progress of the cross-eXami-
nation United States Attorney Beach took
occasion to say that LorenZ nad never pee-i
to his house.
.Lorenz was my friend and acquaint-
ance when he was supposed to be 1nno-
cent Attorney Worthington said. Sus-
eestively, addressing Mr.. Beach. he is
YOUR friend now that he is guilty.
When the proceedings were resumed tIis
morning Attorney Conrad took up the III
rect examination of LorenZ. which was IN
terrunted by the adjournment yesterday
afternoon The witness told of his arrange
ments with Crawford. by when Lore elln
was given the right to furnish straps 1oI
the carriers satchels. However, he never
;.ba cd of Stra and had never
been called upon by the Postal Device ana
Lock Company to furnish a single strap
A letter, dated October ". l3oZ, from
Crawford to Lorenz, in which Crawford
stated to Lorenz that there would soon
be need for another lot Of 1000 straps and
later for 300 additional" was read Inc
witness declared that he had never lux
nished any Of the straps.
The prosecution also produced a letter
written by Wade Chance. president of the
Postal Device and Lock Company. to Lo-
REM under date Of January II, 1903 by
which LorenZ was notified that the last
10. of straps were different in color and
quality from the former lots. The witness
declared that he knew nothing or the straps
to which reference was MADE by MI;
Chance. Crawford, he added, had agreed
to attend to the manufacture of the straps
as well as of the remainder of the supplies
called for by the contract.
..Mr IorenZ' Attorney Conrad said. you
have repeatedly referred to us and we
and our company To whom do you re-
fer?"
ford and mySelf-the subsidiary company
we have spoken Of.
Eorenz was then placed at the disposal of
the defense for cross-examinatlon.
Afternoon Session.
At the opening of the session this after
neon Lorenz was asked regarding a state
ment made by him to a Mr.. Polk that by a
.'coincidence'' Crawford could make his ex-
pense account with tee Postal Device and
Lock Company amount to the same as the
cost OF 5000 satchel straps at 2912 cents
each. Counsel suggested that LorenZ
wanted Crawford to lie. This the witness
denied, saying he had merely mentioned the
matter a coincidence.
During a discussion affecting the state
ment made by LorenZ in the United States
attorneys office in January, 1904. United
States Attorney Beach took occasion to
make a spirited explanatory statement. He
said that the intimation had been given
that the United States attorney had done
something"-that had been prevalent as an
undertone throughout the trial. Mr.. Beach
said he expected to receive a certain
amount of abuse, for which he is paid an
nually, but he did not want the intimation
carried too far.
The court remarked that he had heard
no criticism of the United States attorney.
adding that the prosecuting attorney was
probably unduy sensitive
torney Conrad LorenZ stated that he re-
ceived no invitation to make the statement
to the United States attorney; had received
no suggestion. statement nor hint that he
would not have TO serve out the term In
the penitentiary to which he has been SEN
fenced; that he had no intention of testify
ing against his co-defendants. and that he
has received promise of reward or i'm
muity from the government.
Lorenz was testifying at a late hour this
afternoon.
Cross-Examination Concluded.
The audience that followed the drama to-
day took possession of the standing room.
as well as of the seats in the court room.
Probably never before has witness been
subjected to more carefully arranged
and scathing DISCRIMINATION. Every
body was wide awake. counsel particu-
larly being keenly alert as to everything
that was said and done.
The cross-eXamination OF Lorenz was
concluded at 2 o'clock this afternoon. At
torney Conrad then undertook the redirect
examination of the witness. The latter de-
clared that no suggestion, statement nor
hint has been given him that he Is
not to serve his full term in the peniten-
tary In the Croft case.
Attorneys Charles A. Douglass and Sam