The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1908-03-16
CD. JURY INOICIs
TWO MORE AND
AOJOURHs
ADMINISTERS sAsTlNApo TO
WARNER, HILL EFT AL AND
CONDEMNS SENATORIAL ELEc.
TioN EXPENSE DEALS.

MASON. Mich, March l6.-After De-
ing in session 2S days, examining 20
witnesses and indicting five persons,
the grand jury concluded its work
late Saturday and adjourned.
Two indictments were returned at
the final session, but the names OF
those indicted witt not be made known
until the warrants have been served.
The others indicted are Former
State Treasurer Frank r. Glazisr, Of
Chelsea; City Comptroller Barnett, OF
Bay City, and Probate Judge Dunn, OF
Arenac county.
In the final report. the grand jury
condemns the practice OF state treas
urers depositing state moneys In
banks where state officials are stock
holders. This hits Gov. Warner, who
is a stakeholder In the Detroit United
bank, and few other officials.
Ex-Banking Commissioner George
w Moore Is eensurcd for having per
mitted the frenzied financiering OF the
Glazier bank at Chelsea, while COM
missioner, and also for evading the
law which says that a banking com.
missioner must not be stakeholder
in state bank. by temporarily trans
ferrlng his stock in his Port Huron
bank 10 one OF his family when APP
pointed commissioner.
Auditor General Bradley and State
Land Commissioner Rose are men
toned" for their limited views" as
TO their duties under the law. which
says they must make an examination
every month OF the state treasury.
Campaign Expenses"
The practice OF candidates for Unit
ed States senator paying campaign ex-
penses OF candidates for the legisla-
ture, as Arthur Hill admitted In his
testimony he did, was severely com
mented on. Malcolm Mcleod, candl-
date for United States revenue col
lector at Detroit, also got a dig.
There is testimony before the grand
Jury that Mcleod paid $3.50 or w. Q.
McMillan"s money 10 Duncan Wayne,
OF Midland, for campaign expenses
Here are where the slaps at Gov.
Warner and Arthur Hill come In; 10
quote from the report:
And in this connection we feel bound
to call attention to the improperly
OF the deposit OF state. money in any
bank wherein any state ofhciai is
stockholder. He certainly In such case
has direct pecunlary interest In the
deposit. and this seems TO be the re-
suit which the law intends To avoid.
The dangerous consequences OF so ue-
posting money to the treasurers per-
sonal benefit IL distinctly shown In the
history OF the Chelsea Savings bank.
Nor do we think that the course OF
the late commissioner OF banking,
tGeorss w. Moore, ,of Port Huron), In
regard TO this bank should escape
criticism For more than year PFieF
10 its failure II was known TO this or
fcer that the Chelsea Savings bank
was violating the law in the amount OF
it's loans 10 Mr.. Glazier and his instt-
buttons We are advised that the stat
ute gives the commissioner wide DIS
erection in such matter, but why this
bank should have been permitted to go
on in It's illegal course until more than
one third OF Its assets had been with
drawn by one man and his institutions.
we do not understand This certainly
il not fulfilling the functions Tor which
the state banking department was es-
tablished.