The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1906-05-28
CR0SS:EXAMINER
SURPRISES FORCE
ASKS THE DOCTOR ABOUT BECH-
Tells CHURCH CALL.
Former Insurance Official Is Questioned
on the Witness Stand About Bank
Stock Listed as Insurance Company
Assets-Left Church for, Conference
Over the Matter. "

DR.. J. F. Force, on trial for alleged
embezzlement from the insurance COM
pany of which he was formerly vice
president, was evidently taken by sur
prise today when questioned by the
assistant prosecutor, John F. Dahl, con-
corning an incident that occurred in
church. DR.. Force admitted, after much
questioning, that in January, 1902, Mr..
Bechtel had come to him in church,
had asked him about the certificates
Of Metropolitan bank stock, upon
which the present prosecution is based,
and told him that this stock had been
listed with the assets Of the company
in the 1901 report, and there was in
quiry about it's whereabouts. 49,
Dr.. Force admitted that he left the
church with Mr.. Bechtel and went to
the Minneapolis club. where they had
a conference with Wallace Campbell
he did not produce the stocks for the
examiner, as they belonged to him and
he was not asked personally to give
any explanation of listing them as COM
pany assets. He claimed this action
was mistake. 800.
DR.. Force More Nervous.
| During this examination DR.. Force
showed more uncertainty and nervous
!
two days on the witness stand.
The remainder of the cross-examina-
ton Of DR.. Force occupied the entire
morning and about half an hour this
afternoon. The trial, heightened by the
unexpected strength Of the state s cross
examination Of the defendant, is drag
ging out beyond the limits set by any
Of the interested persons, and from the
present prospects cannot go to the jury
before tomorrow night.
There has not been a case in recent
years more Astounding in documentary
exhibits. The state alone has already
used all the letters in the alphabet tC
den minate its exhibits, and is dow1
to HCC.'
| DIR. Forces Salary.
DR.. Force was recalled to the stand
as soon as court convened in Judg e
sistant Prosecutor Dahl continued will
his cross examination of the defendant
He brought out that the minutes Of tn
insurance company did not show the fix
ing of the salary Of O. E. Force, tn
defendant g son, who was secretary o:
the old company, at 5000 a month, or a
any ether IF figure re-, 40 :, VOW Go, W. :,
1882
"By Check
"signed by whomg' "By myself.
"Will you state that a single checl
was drawn to your son for his service
in 1899"
IT can't state positively.'
, elbow was he paid?"
"The checks drawn to me for on
amount for the salaries Of all the OF
ficers separated the amount anon
them. I have not seen the checks no
tho vouchers -
ftDoctor, have you asked to hav
= here?' 49, ~(e,.. a.,
"No, sir. + didn't think it was net
essary.' ..1t.rrzcz fss,o,,. -
! "You prefer to rely on your memor
= as to how that ~ business was COZ
ductedq" =,
+ ~ O'shaughnessy' Visit.
= CHOW, doctor, in 1900 Mr.; O 'shaugl
t ness, the insurance commissioner, had
he ssS Vls "4e w,' sir: y9o over n7f'' o'u
n "And after that the secretary's SAL
i $500. WASH t it,, Eyes, sir.V
= "And your son didn't object to tai
! ing his little $3.50 month";
+ ri don It remember any objection. E
Y took 1T.
And this REDUCTION y ya in made on
commissioner, was it not9''
"He urged 1t strongly
~ "Where is G. E. Force, your sonYo
= IT don It know whether he is in Ne
u Il York or in Oklahoma
e "Have you !! m %a an any effort to e
~ ~ "And he was the secretary Of IL
e %adpef9y w" Yves, z yir. contract ;"
J The prosecution then took up Il
, IL matter of the defendants alleged i
e crease in his contract salary to SIS, 90
- He endeavored to show that the exit
e $4,000 was not talked over or MAJ
- known to Bechtel. While the defen
n ant was indefinite as to conversation
~ he consistently maintained that the
20 knew of the conditions Of the $500
# contract. 80 -.... p
a. His Back Salary.
$4,000 ' you u told e Of, why didn't "
apply that on your back salary9'
u &c He; didn't pay me that for ba'
Z, salary"
le 'What was it paid for?''
:. It was earnest money on the agre
>, u ment he made to pay me 100000 VIII
~ the consolidation took place. -
- "Didn't you consider your back 81
:, : ary as part Of your rights under yo
h contractq' eyes, sir" ..:...
- What did you consider you we
1e being paid any money from the co,
: panv for9' 'EFor my salary
is What did you return for that 81
It. arygv "services. -
Of "Then on what theory did you alle
er Mr.. Bechtel to pay you $4,000 perso
ri ally and outside Of your salary9'
Sc ment.''