The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1914-04-14


tirely good. There are other features
in this case. This was presented to
the public as an irrigation feature and
the public was induced to invest money.
That it was a bad investment. is be-
yond question. Much of this land could
not have been irrigated under any plan
devised here or put forward.
There is in the mind Of the court
no great difference as to the situation
Of the two defendants. The court will
take into consideration that any good
woman who marries q man, II she
makes the proper kind of wife. sur
renders toa large extent her Individual
just as has been true in this case"
The court then declared that the evil
dence tended to show that both defend
ants We're equally guilty and entered
into scheme to .defraud the public.
Referring to letter offered in evil
dence in the trial Of the case, the
court declared:
by two people as a scheme to defraud
the public. There can be no other in
depreciation of that letter. That must
be considered by the court in this
case"
Then turning to Noun Day the court
said:
You will pay a fine of $1,000 and
committed to the federal penitentiary
at LeavenwOrth for q term Of two
years upon the first count and for
term of two years on the second, third,
fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth and
ninth counts: these subsequent SEN
fences to run concurrently with the
first and all to expire at the end Of two
years.
NIOunDay Was Game.
Noun Day did not VINCE His stoical
appearance that has marked his de-
meanor since the beginning Of his
trial last fall, was in evidence today as
he received his sentence.
The wife. however, looked more
worn and worried than at any time
band.
Mrs. Noun Day the court must as
sess some penalty against you," said
the court. While your connection
minion of your husband over your
mind, you must pay a fine of $500 and
costs OF this prosecution. I am going
to allow you some reasonable period
to see If you can raise this money and
AVOID the penalty Of going to JAIL
United States District Attorney Fred
Robertson and attorneys for the
MounDays then agreed to a conference.
to determine the manner in which the
cost3an the case would be divided and
oSSCoSCu a8dAuOl tno Two OSIcnO0nl9.
No definite statement was made re-
garding an appeal. II a writ of error
is sought, the courts stay Of execution
will be held in force pending final ac-
ton on the appeal. Should the defen-
dants accept the penalty imposed by
the court. MounDay viii probably be
| taken to the federal prison at Leav-
enworth at an early date.
Brief Story Of the Case.
MounDay and his wife were presi-
dent and secretary respectively of the
American Sugar Manufacturing Re-
filming company. a New Mexico cOrpor-
alton. Their first troubles came near
, ly q year ago when they encountered
difficulties in securing permit from
the blue sky" department of the bank
commissioners office. Then the state
began custer suits against the COM
pan1.
\ tons was turned over to the govern
ment and the offices Of the sugar COM
pany were raided in July. 1s13. Both
J MounDay and his wife were arrested
| for misuse Of the mails In furtherance
| Of q scheme to defraud. They were
held to the federal grand jury. which
returned q true bill indicting them or
| ten counts each. Following the trial
| Of the case in Kansas City. the govern.
ment dismissed A. to the tenth count
and the defendants were found guilty
ON the remaining nine counts. Mo-
tons for new trial were today over
| ruled.
1 In the trial Of the case, the govern
ment established the fact that the de-
PENDANTS did not hold title to land
which they sought to convey. that
their proposed irrigation projects were
hopeless dreams. that the sugar COM
| pany owned no water rights. that pic
lures Of growing crops ana nourtah-
! ing factories were freaks Of thes Inn
agfnati0n and did not exist on the