Evening journal., 1914-10-12
UNCLE SAM after
CANAL DIVIDENDS
Suit Against c. & D. Com
pany to Recover $50, 900
Alleged to be Due
SAY FORGERY PLAYED
PART IN NON-PAYMENT

The October term of the u. S.
District Court convened here today
with Judge Edward G. Bradford on
the bench. The petit jurors drawn
some time ago were present with the
exception of Fred c. Phillips, de-
ceased. William A. Humes was OK
cused owing TO being past the age
limit, 20 years. David Snellenburg
was the last juror drawn.
The case of the Government vs.. the
Chesapeake and Delaware Canal
Company was called, the Government
being represented by District Attor-
uey John p Nields and Chapman w.
Maupin of the United States attorney
generals Office. Andrew G. Gray, OF
Ward, Gray and Neary, and Charles
Bddle and Sons Of Philadelphia, rep
resented the canal company. The action
of fiie government is TO recover $4,000
OF allege dividends unpaid on canal
stocks held by the government with III
terest from 1875.
The first count alleges S2l $3.50 due
with interest since 1874; Sl4625 with
interest since 1875; Sl4,625 with inter
est since 1876. or a general indebtedness
of 1854. 600 claimed by the government
Mr.. Maupin outlined the governments
case telling of the trouble of the United
States treasury in collecting on the
stock. In speaking of the case he said;
Eve not only depend upon the failure
of the archives of the United States TO
show that these disputed dividends
were never paid, but we shall also
show that two officers of this canal
company obtained these dividends and
by the double stroke of a pen made
what we regard as a fraudulent docu-
ment to cover evidence of their pay
ment.
I'VE shall also show you the
facsimile of a letter from a fictitious
assistant treasurer Of the United
States with the name Of A. B. Holmes
signed. There never was an assist
ant treasurer of that name. and We
shall show you that this person is
merely the outcome Of a forgery made
by an employee Of the canal company.
I'VE also have a draft signed by A.
3. Holmes, assistant secretary of the
treasury, drawn upon the treasury at
Philadelphia, Pa. No such person ever
existed in the employ Of the Govern
ment. and we expect to show you that
the president and treasurer of the
canal company signd these fictitious
names in the dividend books Of the
company"
]. OReilly, an executive clerk in
the office of the Treasury Department,
was the first witness called, and he
produced the certificates Of stock in
the canal company held by the gov
eminent. These we're not objected
10.
Walter Hall. secretary and treas
urer Of the canal company since 1892,
was called by Mr.. Nields, who said he
wanted to prove the governments
ownership of the shares, numbering
1926 shares.
Mr.. Biddle said they we're willing
10 admit the ownership of these
shares. The witness was then asked
to produce the minute books of the
defendant company, dating from 1903
10 1909. At the request OF Mr..
Nields the witness marked the pages
containing minutes of the various
yearly meetings from 1874 to 1876.
The book was then offered in evil
dence, the canal company attorneys
not Directing.
Mr. Hall then produced the letter
from the Assistant Treasurer Of the
L. S. Government dated June II, 1911.
Mr.. Riley. called to the stand, said
the signature on the letter was that
Of Franklin McVeigh. the assistant
treasurer Of the United States. Mr..
Biddle said this was admitted
Mr.. Hall was then cross-examined
by Charles Biddle. who asked him
TO refer to the minutes of the meet
ing of 1873. a portion Of which we're
read
Mr.. Biddle said he desired TO show
that the company had complied with
the requirements of its charter.
JuSge Bradford said: "If you pro-
pose TO show that the government Of
ficials we're lax in regard to collect
ing the dividends. il is my duty TO
inform you that you cannot do So"
The court suggested that il pres
ent methods of considering tho vari-
Gus questions was 10 be continued, IL
would be better TO settle the point
at once. Court took a recess until
$50 o'clock.