Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1911-08-05
"CLAIM AGENTS"
ARE NOW CHARGED
With EXT0RTI0N
Especial to the Tribune)

RICHARDTON, N. D., Aug. "a
case of alleged extortion occurred in
Richardton, Stark county, on July 81
which is probably of interest to most
of the inhabitants of the slope cOun'
try. George Davis, agent of the Oc-
cident Elevator company, was accused
of being short in his shipment &C.
counts, at first to the amount of
about $500, then about $500, and on
July 31st F. A. Cousins, another agent
of the Occident concern, went to Rich
ardton, together with C. E. Jennings,
who claimed to be claim adjuster for
bonding company which was surety
for Davis. 1t is alleged that Cousins
and Jennings charged Davis with en-
bezzlement and demanded SITS OF
Davis in settlement of their claim un-
der threat of Jail, threatening Davis
also with various personal damage to
his reputation and future, and loss If
he failed to settle with them at once,
also threatening Davis family with
damage to Davis if he did not pay,
and chiefly by this last means forced
Davis to pay them $12S in settlement
of their entire claim. After getting
advice upon the subject Davis ex-
planned his difficulty to the justice
and Cousins and Jennings were ar
rested on criminal charge of extortion,
extortion being described in law as
the obtaining of property from an
other with his consent, induced by
wrongful use of force or fear, or un-
der color of official right. The next
day they were released on change of
venue after depositing $4,000 cash as
security for their appearance in court.
Cousins and Jennings went to Dick
inson, where it is said that one of
them boasted ttat they had fixed"
the states attorney.
Davis is a young man of excellent
reputation amongst both farmers and
town people and it will be very hard
for either the elevator company or the
bonding company to prove that he has
embeZzled. He was engaged in buy
ing grain for the elevator company
and shipping it to hem at Minneapolis
and Mandan, and it is said that his
shipments were found short upon ar
rival. 1t is on account of this claimed
shortage that he was charged with
embezzlement, but as evidence against
his guilt he has made no appearance
of concealing anything, and has made |
no effort to get away at any time.
1t is highly probable that every |
agent for large grain buyer is con-
fronted with this same difficulty, and
it apears to be the plan of some con-
Germs to always charge their agents
with being short in their weight in
order to have them make sure of get
ting very liberal weight from the farm
ers to cover such loss. It would be
possible for a grain buyer to pay five |
cents bushel more for grain than
the market price if he could be al
lowed to fix his scales so as to more
than meet the amount overpaid, and
in the purchase of a thousand bushels
of grain it might be an easy matter
for an agent to steal twenty-five BUSH
els, but it Is hard to see what ad-
vantage one buyer can gain over an
other buyer. If both buyers practice
the same scheme Of theft, and a third
buyer willing to give honest weight
would surely secure the most Of the
business and enjoy larger gain from
a just profit than either or .both dis
honest buyers. However, the largest
concerns set the example for the small
ones, and what theft one succeeds in
danger the others immitate.