The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1906-05-25
Business Men of Kansas CITY
Receive Commissions From
Unknown Sources.
MEMORIES ON STAND
PROVE VERY DEFECTIVE
Firms Failed to Keep Any Rec
ord of the Large Amounts
They Received.

KANSAS CITY, May 24-Members
of half dozen large business firms
| admitted here today at the trial in the
Federal court of George H. Crosby, the
Burlington traffic manager; George l.
Thomas, the New York freight broker
and the latters clerk, L. B. Taggart
that they had received thousands OF
! dollars In commissions from unknown
sources"
Witnesses Don't Know.
All of the firms had hired Thomas
to attend to the shipping of their goods
| from the Atlantic seaboard to their
! stores in st. Louis and Kansas City,
| but none of the witnesses would say
| that these sums of money had come
from Thomas. w. E. Emery, a MEM
Der of the Emery Bird Thayer Dry
| Goods company who admitted .receiv-
ing from $500 to $4,000 a year, said
he did not know who sent it, but sup
| posed 1t came from Thomas"
No Record Kept.
Notwithstanding the large sums thus
! paid in commissions, none of the firms
had kept any record of the amounts,
according TO the witnesses. All pay
ments were made in New York.
Several officials of the Burlington
| railroad were examined as to the pay
ment OF these commissions by that
| company, and their testimony dcvel-
oped the fact that the vouchers for the
amounts had disappeared.
Denies Conspiracy.
The Government rested their side of
| the case in the afternoon, when Judge
O. NJ. Spencer, for the defendants, filed
a demurrer In all the cases. arguing
that no evidence had been produced to
show a case of conspiracy, and even
If such evidence had been presented
the court lacked jurisdiction, as the al
legged crime was committed in New
York and not in Missouri. He asked
that the case OF Crosby be dismissed.
Judge Smith Mcpherson oyerruled
the motion as to Crosby and said that
argument on the demurrer would be
had tomorrow morning, to which time
the court adjourned
Did Net Know Source.
r. II. McKittrick. president of the
Hargadine- McKittrick Dry Goods COM
pany OF St Louis. the first witness,
who had testified that he had employed
Thomas at a salary of $500 g. year to
look after the interests of his firm In
the matter of railway rates and routing
from the East admitted that he had
received various sums of money from
unknown sources"
In one instance Mr.. McKittrick testi-
fed, person whom he did not know,
entered his (McKittrick's) office in
New York City one day and handed
him a bundle Of money, containing be-
tween s400 and $500
Was Densely Ignorant,
Mr.. McKittrick declared that he did
\ 4, = cri,- hl,N1
this money; that he had not since seen
him; that he did not believe he would
be able to identify the man, and fur
ther, that he did not know for what
purpose the money was given him, nor
from what source it came,
At this point. District Attorney Van
Valkenburgh requested w. &. Kelby
Thomas's clerk, to stand up, and, point
ing to Kelby. asked of the witness;
Us this the man who handed the
money to you in your New York Of
nCe?"
Il do not know; do not believe
could identify the man." replied Mr..
McKittrick.
Was to Save Money.
McKittrick, continuing his testimony.
said that he had employed Thomas
while he was In New York on May /,
1902, signing a contract, which was re-
newed again in 1903. Thomas had. he
! said, solicited employment, claiming
that he would be able TO ship goods TO
McKittrick's house from the East In
the most economical way and by the
railway giving the best service.
| Thomass duties also were to include
| the settlement OF all cases of losses In
| Shipments and overcharges. and to OBJ
| tain from Lowell. Mass, and other mill
centers. the usual mill allowances Of
! fered buyers who accepted freight on
a basis of shipment from New York
Thomas had been employed later on
the same conditions. but with no new
| contract
Could Not Remember.
In reply to q direct question Mr.. Nc
! kittrick said that he had at various
times received money from unknown
| sources"
| Witness then detailed the receipt OF
the money In his New York office from
| an unknown man. Continuing, he said
that some Of the money had been re-
| ceiyed by express. In this manner. he
said. his firm had within four or five
years received about $4,000. during
which time they had paid out s4S0000
| in freight charges, In one instance.
| he said he had received some money
personally and this he had deposited in
his brothers private bank.
To Secure Commissions.
On cross s-examination. Mr. McKit-
trick said that In seeking employment
Thomas had said he would get any
legitimate commissions from railways
that Mckittricks firm might be en-
titled to and from any water lines not
subject to the Interstate Commerce act.
Witness said he and Thomas had
talked over the matter of rebates, and
II was agreed that no rebates were to
be sought Hc did not know that the
money received in his New York Office
OF by express had come from Thomas
The next witness was Hugh McKit-
Trick, son OF T. II. McKittrick and
Flce-president OF the Hargadine Mckit-
trick Dry Goods company.
Just "Odds and Ends"
Hugh McKittrick testified to recciy-
ing money twice while In the New York
Office Once In 1902 an express package
containing $4,000 WAS received by wit
ness. He did not know where IT came
from The money was credited In a