Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1912-07-19
CONSPIRACY |NB|DS? DRAFT IS PREPARED
This Charge Registered Answer to Roosevelt Mems
Against Five Laundrymen Charges Drawn Up
INDICTMENT IS RETURNED TELLS OF ALL CONTESTS
United Taft
Is Alleged paign Document
INQUIRY BY GRAND JURY EX-SENATOR MASON HOPEFUL
to Sends toH Help Re-
This Charge Registered
Against Five LaundryInen.
INDICTMENT IS RETURNED
Plot to Defraud the United States
Is Alleged.
INQUIRY BY GRAND JURY
Conusion in Preparation Of Increased
Estimates for Work Said to
Have Been Unearthed,

A conspiracy to defraud the United
States by shutting of competition on
contracts to do its laundry work is
charged in an indictment for conspiracy
returned by the grand jury today against
certain officers and representatives of
local laundry concerns. The alleged fraud
was in connection with bids advertised for
the washing of towels in the various de-
partments of the federal government for
the present fiscal year.
Had not the alleged scheme been de-
tected, 1t Is said many thousands of
dollars would have been lost to the gov-
ernment. An inquiry started In one OF
the departments developed the fact that
the bids for laundering towels for the
year 1912-1913 were douole those of the
preceding fiscal year. A comparison of
notes disclosed almost corresponding in
creases In the other departments and
brought about the submission OF the mat
ter to United States Attorney Wilson for
investigation by the grand jury. Assist
ant United States Attorney Huidekoper
grand jury and prepared the indictment
returned today.
Those Persons Accused.
The persons accused Of a conspiracy to
defraud are Louis Levy. vice president OF
the Frazee-Potomac Laundry Company;
Frederick w. Mackenzie, secretary and
treasurer of the Tolman Laundry; Clar-
ence F. Sewers. treasurer Of the Columbia
Laundry Company: Thomas Hill Mar
shall. manager of the Grafton Laundry
Company. and proprietor of MARSHALL S
Laundry. and Leon s. Tyndall, associated
in the laundry business in general
capacity.
James s. Cotton, who conducts a laun-
dry In his own name, Ia mentioned in the
Indictment as one OF the original CON
spirators, but Is not among those ac-
cused Of crime. Cotton was a fell
pected to appear for the prosecution when
the case Is called for trial.
Alleged Scheme.
The scheme Of the alleged conspiracy
as gathered from the allegations of the
indictment was that the FIVE accused
laundrymen as early as September /.
1910. conspired and agreed with Mr. Cot
ton that the towel work Of the various
departments should be appOrtioned
among the laundries represented by
Although the Indictment sets the date
Of the formation of the alleged con-
spiracy back to 1910. the alleged overt
acts are said not to have occurred until
the spring Of 1912, when bids were asked
for the work Of the present fiscal year.
The terms OF the agreement appear to
have been that bids would be SO manipu-
lated that the lowest bid for the post
once towel washing would be submitted
by the Tolman Laundry, for the work of
the State. War and Treasury departments
by the Frazee-Potomac Company; for the
bureau of engraving and printing by the
Columbia Laundry; for the Agricultural
Department by James Cotton, and for
the government printing Office by the
F'razee-Potomac Company. and so on
throughout the various federal offices
having this kind Of work done.
The indictment charges that the alleged
conspirators agreed that the company
entitled" to have the work Of q partfcu-
lar department would submit the low
est bid and that each Of the othe: bid
ders would name a price in excess OF
that figure, so that the chosen one would
be the lowest bidder and obtain the con-
tract.
Silent on Discovery,
Just how the government learned Of the
alleged conspiracy in time to frustrate
1t Assistant United States Attorney
Huidekoper declined to divulge. The dis
covery, however. leaves the department
In q position where 1t must make tenn
porary arrangements for washing the
towels.
1t Is hard to figure the amount Of finan-
cial loss that would have been involved
in the success of the alleged scheme, as
the contracts made with some Of the de-
partments do not contain an estimate Of
the number Of pieces Of laundry WORK"
q a nea vnHac tr<s1 opH
In the Department Of Agriculture and
in the Treasury 100000 pieces are washed
annually in each department, and at an
estimate Of q double increase of price the
additional cost to each department would
be about $1,000. The work OF the other
departments. with perhaps the exception
of the Interior Department. Is lighter
than these two mentioned. but the total
increase would have gone well up into
the thousands Of dollars. 1t Is said.
Indictment Long One.
The indictment covers thirty-one pages
Of typewriting. and after setting out In de-
tail the duty Of the officials in each de-
partment OF the government to call for
bids for laundry work and to reject any
submitted in collision or other irregu-
lar manner details the scheme OF the
alleged conspiracy and charges each Of
the FIVE men accused with the criminal
offenSe of conspiracy.
Names Of Witnesses.
The names Of the witnesses appearing
on the indictment are James S. Cotton.
Frank p. Wilcox. Edward B. Farren,
Franklin v. Killian. George r. Page. B.
L. Nevius, Frank II. Walker. Edward
L. Brice, Henry NJ. Conger. Daniel II.
Koop. Frank E. Ferguson, Henry G.
Rand and Clyde B. Ambrose.
The defendants will probably be mott
fed of the return of the indictment and
will arrange through counsel to give
bond. The case probable will be called
for trial in November.