The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1914-10-08
SENSATION IN CASE.

Continued from Page One.1
McKeever declared were ''phony.''
"Blitz would bring a hatful Of this
stuff to the bank and leave it for Sc
curity. but the loans to him kept on
Increasing until in January. 1912 they
'.Mr. Lillard has referred to q bill
, OF sale covering Blitz's Automobile.
which Blitz turned over to the bank.
That automobile sold for $45 and there
"Blitz did net claim IS. 900 was due
him from the bank when he filed his
statement under oath with Judge
Slonecker. federal referee in bank
ruptcy. But afterwards he went to
the bank and wanted a loan of $1,000.
Naturally the loan was refused. Had
the bank officials loaned this bankrupt
thirty cents they would have been put
In an insane asylum.
Elk United states Attorney"
THE evidence will show that then
Blitz threatenedsthe bank officials
that he would change his testimony
before the referee in bankruptcy and
would claim. that $1,000 and that the
attorneys in the case would give him
one-half of the amount. He said that
he had Fred Robertson. United States
district attorney. fixed; that he had
Judge Slonecker, United States referee
in bankruptcy fixed, and that he also
had Mr.. Newell, one of the attorneys
in this case fixed.
tell people that the bank was failing.
and admitted that he had already done
so, and that he would not let up until
he secured q loan from the bank. He
even phOned to a man at Newman and
told him the bank was falling and
that the state bank commissioners Of
flee was preparing to take charge.
Willing for Penitentiary Is Charge.
And he made good his threat to
change his testimony. and in No
vember, 1913, months after hav-
ing given his testimony. he went back
and changed 1t, and at that time on
cross examination admitted that he
was a perjurer and expected to go to
the penitentiary, and that he was will
ing to go. II he could take f. T. Metz
ger, former president OF the bank. to
the penitentiary with him."
Mr.. Lillard. in explaining to the
jury what he expected to prove. told
of Blitz's alleged dealing with the
bank. He stated that business was
done in rather. "a loose way by both
sides;" that B1itz frequently would
leave diamonds and other va1uables
with the banksas security for loans
and that no records of these were
kept. and that frequently Blitz would
go to the bank and take away dia-
monds thus left to show to customers.
He also told OF the allege dcredit-
ors' sale conducted by Blitz and of
Blitz having assigned his lease to a
building near the National hotel, and
a one-han interest he had in his home
and Of giving bill Of sale on his
automobile, all to the bank to secure
his obligations there. -
- 8 oWnsefsiIEps OF 81, 900. g
It was through Metzgers knowledge
of BNtz's business affairs that Samuel
Freidberg and Blitz were brought to-
gether, with the result that Freidberg
purchased Blitz's jewelry store and
gave Blitz a check for $1,000 which
Blitz deposited In the German Amer
lean State bank and which the bank
applied In payment OF Blitz's debts to
the bank. 1t is the contention Of the
defendants that the bank had a right
to do this The suit is brought to
determine the rightful ownership Of
this $1,000.
AS outlined In the opening state
ment of Mr.. McKeever, the defense
will attempt to prove that Blitz Sc
cured loans through misrepresenta-
ton, claiming that he had a stock
worth $4,000 at least and at times
| even $4,000 and practically no
debts.
The part played by Metzeer. former
president of the bank, in the banks
dealings with Blitz, has not yet been
taken up in detail.