Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-05-31
Witness for Prosecution in
Crawford Trial
CREATES SENSATION
SMALL AUDIENCE AT OPENING OF
THE HEARING.
Several Post Office Inspectors Give Tes-
testimony Today Regarding the
Preliminary Investigation.

this morning when the trial of William q.
Crawford. accused of conspiring with Au-
gust W. Machen and George r.. Lorenz to
defraud the government. in connection with
contract for supplying the Post Office
Department with carriers satche!s, was re-
sumed. the hearing having been adjourned
day before yesterday, consisted of an even
dozen persons-eleven men and one woman
The mass of documentary evidence that
has been introduced was of no interest to
those not directly concerned In the trial. SO
the presentation of the same Eas kept the
attendance down to an unusually low num-
Der. The reading to the jury of a state
ment made by Crawford to former Fourth
Assistant Postmaster General Bristow. In
the presence of several post office inspect
ors. consumed great deal of time during
the session this morning. Just before the
usual midday recess was taken interest was
revived by the spreading of a rumor that
during the session this afternoon George E
Lorenz would be called as witness for the
prosecution.
Lorenz Witness.
The expected sensation of the trial
cured at the opening of the session this
afternoon, when George E. Lorenz was
called as witness for the prosecution.
Lorenz was Jointly indicted with Machen
and Crawford in the carriers satchels case,
and was convicted jointly with Machen. and
the Croft brothers in the Machen-Lorenz-
Croft case. He is under sentence of peni-
Tertiary Imprisonment for two years and to
pay a fine of S10OG0 in the latter case, but
the sentence has not been carried INTO
effect.
IT has been suggested that Lorenz has
been promised immunity in return for max
ing disclosures to the government IN lne
case now on hearing. Lorcnz testified this
of substance that he came 90
this city in June. 1902. on summons IRON
Machen; was told by Machen that the lat
ter wanted Lorenz to join Macnen ana
Crawford in "a deal for putting In a Did
for furnishing carriers SatchelS' to the
Post Office department. and was told by
Crawford that the latter and Machen hau
concluded that they might as Well form
sort of subsidiary company to furnish the
satchels themselves"
Further. Iorenz said he Machen and
Crawford had several conferences on the
subject Machen suggested to the witness
that one-fourth of the profits should go to
Crawford. one-fourth TO LorenZ and one
half to Machen, Lorenz and Machen TO
later divide equally their total of three
fOurthS of the profits.
Counsel for the defense displayed keen
alertness while Lorenz was testifying The
court room was soon filled with eager
listeners, due to TIE sudden change from
dullness to liveliness in the proceedings.
What Government Expected to Prove.
Evidently the prosecution hoped to prove
by introducing the statement made by
Crawford to Mr.. Bristow that the defendant
not frank in answering questions
lating TO his contract with Lorenz; that
Crawford was aware that Lorenz was on
intimate terms with Machen. and that
Crawford employed Lorenz on the carriers
satchel deal solely because Lorenz was on
such intimate terms with Machen. and
therefore would be of value to Crawford in
the making of contracts for supplying ar
ticles to the Post Office Department.
The governments case, 1t is understood
Is rapidly drawing to close. The intro
duction of evidence in chief for the prose-
cution will probably be concluded tomor-
row. Then the defense will have its in
nings.
The utmost good feeling prevails between
United States Attorney Beach. Assistant
United States Attorney Keigwin and Maj
Holmes Conrad, counsel for the government
on the one side, and Attorneys A. s. Worth
ington, John G.. Carlisle and Charles l..
Frailey. for the defense, on the other SIDE.
There have been no acrimonious exchanges
between counsel.
Former Postmaster General Wynne was
In court for short time this morning. He
may remain in this city until another case
growing out of the Post Office Department
irregularities is placed on trial. possibly in
the very near future.
Post Office Inspectors on the Stand.
Rush E. Simmons a post office inspector
NNO "ciS ltSlAlyiiiS il INC iIOuI VI duJoulll-
ment Monday afternoon. resumed his seat
on the witness stand when the proceedings
were resumed this morning. Inspector
Simmons told further of the statement,
read in evidence Monday, made by Mr..
Crawford at the post office in New York
city the evening OF May %. 1903. in the
presence of the witness and Post Office
Inspector Sullivan. On cross-examination
1t admitted that Mr.. Crawford prompt
ly placed himself at the disposal of the in
spectors on the occasion in question and
answered all the questions they asked
him.
John D. Sullivan, a post office inspector,
was the next witness He was present
during the interview with Crawford May
"a 1903, and testified substantially as did
Inspector Sullivan, through a question
asked by Attorney Worthington. that
Crawford broke an engagement in order to
comply with the wishes of the inspectors
that he should meet them at the post
office in New York city the evening of
May 81. 1893.
John r. Tulis. a stenographer and type
writer in the employ of the Post Office De
partment. called as a witness He re-
ported, geographically, an interview of
former Fourth Assistant Postmaster Cen
eral Bristow with Crawford at the Post
Office Department. this city, in the pres
ence of several inspectors. The witness
Identified the typewriter transcription he
made of his shorthand notes of the inter
Nic" MS statement, Wnlch Is or extreme
length. was then read TO the jury. Assist
ant United States Attorney Keigwin read
until he grew weary. when his place a.
reader was taken by United States At
torney Beach. According to the statement
crawford was interrogated by Fourth AS
slstant Postmaster General Bristow re-
garding his arrangement with George E.
l1orenz regarding the contract for supplying
The Post Office Department with carriers
satchels. During the interview Mr.. Bris-
tow remarked that there was a surprising
lack OF knowledge on the part OF Mr
crawford rs 10 the latter's arrangement
with l.orenz. and accused Crawford OF moi
being frank in his answers TO the ouestions
asked him. This charge Crawford denied.
Gave Negative Reply.
During the interview Mr.. Bristow asked
Mfr. Crawford:
Did you not employ Lorenz because he
was on intimate terms with Machen and
would therefore be OF value to your"
Crawford replied in the negative. saying
he was merely aware that Lorenz knew
Machen and that Lorenz and Machen were
from q m az