New-York tribune., 1910-01-06
f. A. HEINZE PLEADS
READY FOR STRUGGLE
Determined to Contest Mer-
camille Bank Charges.

Fritz Augustus Henze Is back from
Montana ready to engage In what appears
to be another long tussle with the courts
over the matter of his management of the
Mercantile National Bank. He looked de-
termined rather than defiant when he
entered the United States Circuit Court
yesterday morning with his brother Arthur
p. Heinze ready to plead not guilty TO the
indictments that had been returned against
him for nisapplication of the funds OF the
bank and for conspiracy to obstruct justice
by taking out of the federal grand turys
reach records that were considered essen
tial to it's investigation.
Arthur Heinze, who came on from the
West with his brother, was there because
he, too. had been indicted on the con-
spiracy charge. as had been Carlos War
field. first vice-president of the Ohio Copper
Company, a HeInze concern. Calvin o.
Geer, clerk of Heinze's United Copper
Company, and Sanford Robinson, who was
once counsel for the company, were also
indicted. AS in the case of the Heinzes
and Warfleld. pleas OF not guilty were
entered for them by their counsel.
John C. Tomlinson and Stephen Brooks
Rosenthal appeared for F. A. Heinze,
William Rand. jr., for Arthur p. Heinze.
John B. stanchfeld for Warfeld and Geer
and Joseph P. Cotton. jr., for Robinson.
Mr Tomlinson apparently had been desig-
mated 10 lead the legal forces n the first
skirmish with United States District At
torney Wise and his aids. He soon showed
that Heinze was going TO make a fight.
The intentions of Heinze were disclosed
when Mr.. TomIinson and Mr.. Wise arrived
at their first difference of opinion in the
proceedings. II came when Heinzes lawyer
asked for delay of two weeks to prepare
a motion TO Quash the indictments. That
brought Mr.. Wise TO his feet with the
declaration that the defendants lawyers
had had plenty of time to define their
course. for they had been informed almost
a month ago, he said. Of the nature of the
indictments, which were returned BY the
grand. jury on October L.
well, we've decided what we want to
do" replied Mr.. Tomlinson. with spirit.
I'VE have our demurrer here now and a
motion to quash, but new facts not shown
in this indictment have come to our at
tention within the last few days. and these
may give ground for further motion to
quash."
Mr.. Tonnlinson wanted at least ten days,
but Judge Hough ordered the immediate
fling of the demurrer. and set January 13
as the day for the hearing of the motion
to quash.
Heinze's lawyers made il plain that they
would have something to say about things
that took place and statements that were
made in the grand jury room while IL was
considering the Heinze matter that do not
appear on the record. The nature OF the
information on which they are basing their
motion to quash the indictment they refused
to dlvuIge, but It was intimated pretty
plainly that Heinze was ready to retaliate
in the investigating line IL pushed to 1t.
The indictment against Heinze supersedes
one of sixteen counts demurrers to fifteen
of which were sustained by Judge Hough
in September There are eighteen counts
in the new Indictment. The former indict-
ment was based on sixteen transactions.
but in the new one eight of these have been
dropped and two new ones added. The
addition of these two seems to have caused
sCme surprise to Heinze, for his lawyers
Levy, ROsenthal & Heermance-isSued
statement last night. saying that they were
based on loans antecedent TO the others.
The data on them. they say. were at all
times at the disposal of the United States
attorney.
The total amounts OF the funds of the
bank which Heinze is accused of having
taken and used for improper purposes
reaches $1,45l, 900. or this amornt 900 is
said to have been handed over to Otto
Heinze & Co. to help the scheme of the
Heinzes TO boom the price of United Cop
per. In one of the two new counts it is
alleged that 100000 was used in discounting
note of Primrose & Braun; in the other
HeinZe is charged with making loan of
$500, 900 10 himself to be used in furthering
the movement to boost the prices of United
Copper.
Heinze's lawyers say that eight of the
transactions which form the basis of the
indictment rest primarily on the alleged
Insolvency of Otto HeinZe & Co. prior TO
the panic of October, 1907 This seems
strange to them. they say in view of the
fact that it was recently declared by the
court that the firm of Otto Heinze & Co.
was in a solvent condition on and before
October IA, 1907.
Heinzes lawyers, in their statement last
night, said there were incomprehensible
misstatements of fact as TO the various
loans made TO Otto Heinze & Co