The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1905-04-21
SUIT AGAINST CUMMINGS.
Great Falls Man Claims That He Was
Defrauded.

offices in this city and headquarters at
st. Paul. The amount involved is 81
go.
In the complaint it is set up That
Rickter, the plaintiff, deposited with A.
j. Cummings the sum stated, which
money Cummings is charged with hav-
ing appropriated to his own use and has
ever since failed to return. The deal
is said to have been made at Great
Falls. Mont, where A. j. Cummings
mas branch office, which, according to
the statements made was subsequently
conducted as the Western Grain and
Stock Exchange, which change of name,
so the complaint charges, was for the
purpose of defrauding the depositors
and other creditors.
The record of A. J. Cummings has
been referred to several times in the
past by the Times. The claim is made
bv those who are acquainted with the
Minneapolis grain trade that Cum
mings has done the same thing so often
that it has become his regular practice
to fail as soon as the conditions make
il profitable for him to do so. Some
times the business is nominally or act
ually outsold to other parties.
An illustration of this method was
recited in the case of George E. De
Neen of Cumberland, Md, who came
on from Pittsburg several months ago
to file case against Cummings in
volving about $4,000. That case was
filed in the United States circuit court
at st. Paul. De Neen bought some
Brooklyn Rapid Transit stock through
Cummings, but ne subsequently found
that Cummings did not execute the
stock purchase at all, but kept the
deposits. and the matter will be
brought to conclusion in the United
States court.
Mr.. Cummings also went to Buffalo,
\. Y, and Detroit, Mich, and opened
brokerage business under the name of
F. L. Camp & Co., with similar results
in both of these places, and one H. FL.
Hartsock comes on and commences suit
for 81 GAO, making the same charge of
embezzlement as was made in the De
Neen case Mr.. Hartsock also repre-
sents claims for other parties, ranging
from $500 to $1,000. All of these cases
are now pending in the United States
court in st. Paul, Mimi.
After this record Mr.. Cummings went
to Great Falls, Butte and Helena,
Mont and was at the Great Falls Of
flee that the transaction recited by
Rickter is said to have occurred. Mr..
Rickter's representatives, have been
trying to locate funds of Mr.. Cum
mings in banks, but have been unable to
do so, and garnishment proceedings have
been commenced against his local rep
resentative 1t seems that all funds
are kept in the hands of mis- local man
ayers to avoid trouble. Recently Mr..
Cummings opened up at Salt Lake City
and Ogden, Utah. and Boise, Idaho, do
ing business under the name of c. v.
Cummings.
The sensational part of the whole
story, however, lies i'll Mr.. Cummings
answer under oath, in the De Neen
case, in which he says that lie was only
running "bucket shop, or place
where bets were made on the rise and
fall of the market, and that all of
his customers were not entitled to any
consideration.
The language of the answer is such
a bold declaration that it has created
a surprise among the parties interested
in the case. The language of the an
swer foilows:
The said copartnership was organized
for the purpose of carrying on and was
engaged in the business of carrying on
bucket shop so-called, that said bus
mess consisted in wagering with other
parties upon the future price, quota
tions, on the exchange of stocks. grain
and other products as compared with
the then prices thereof and not other
wise, all of which upon information
and belief defendant AYERS was at all
said dates and times fully known to
the plaintiff and upon information and
belief defendant denies that the plain
tiff ever had any business or dealings
of any kind with this defendant and
his associates, or any of them, but
AYERS That if he ever had each and all
of such business and dealings were as
plaintiff and all parties to such business
and dealings fully understood and
agreed were wagers upon the future
prices quoted on the exchanges and
board of trade, of stocks, grain and
other products as compared with the
then quoted prices thereof, and wherein
and whereby no actual purchases or
sale or delivery was contemplated by
either party but the one party was to