The Birmingham age-herald., 1915-02-11
WITNESSES TELL IF DEALINGS WITH THE STANDARD HOME CO.
Little Variance in Testi- mony of Twenty-One Wit nesses Placed on the
 Stand Yesterday

The examination of the government witnesses in the case of the Standard Home company, on trial in the federal court before Judge W. I. Grubb is pro- gressing at a rapid rate. Of the 21 wit nesses examined yesterday there was lit- tie variance in the testimony except as to minor details of their transactions with the company.
 After asking the name. residence and occupation of each witness, o. D. Street, special attorney, who is prosecuting, as Judge Robert N. Bell, incumbent, is dis qualified on account of having been coun- sel for the defendant company. would in- variably ask the question: Have you company?'
 Answer: 'Yes, sir"
 Question: State the nature and extent of your transactions with the company to the jury''
 Witness would state that he purchased one or more contracts, to be paid at the rate of s6 per month each, with the understanding that he would receive d loan of 5000, after six months, or not
  tracts were read to them, or if they read them before signing the application, some would reply they had not. some said, mot very carefully" one or two admit ted that they had.
 Question by District Attorney: "Did you receive the loan of s1000 as promised?'
 Answer: II did not"
 Question: what became of the con- tracts you held?"
 Answer: 'T turned them back to the company and received about one-third of the amount I paid in"
 There was some variance in the amount received back, some receiving more and some less
 The witness would then be asked to identify literature sent through the mails by the company, which they invariably did. This is one of the important points in the case as using the mails in vio- lation of the law is the charge in the indictment.
 Under the ruling of Judge Grubb the file of the defendant company containing the correspondence passed between the witnesses and the company were pro- duced in court and submitted as part of the evidence.
 In a number of instances Walker Percy of counsel for the defendant company would read to the jury parts of the corre- spondence that passed between the wit ness and his client in reference to appli- cations for loans and the answer of the company thereto.
 Did you sign this application for a contract?" MT. Percy would ask.
 q did was the answer in almost every instance.
 ''Did you read the conditions of the application?
 Some said they did, others they did not and some said they read it partially. The application contains a clause that the applicant has acquainted himself with the terms and conditions of the contract he is applying for. Mir Percy generally got an admission that the persons knew what they were signing, and that in a number of cases the promise of a loan in six months came from an agent of the company.
 A break in the testimony of the wit nesses was the examination of several persons who had acted as agents for the company. In one instance detailed de- scription of the company's methods was given, MT. Percy reading a letter from the company telling an agent not to guar antee loan in six months to prospective contract buyers.
 The hearing will be resumed at 9:3o this morning.
 The witnesses testifying yesterday were w. M. Murchinson, Martin, Tex; T. M. Williamson, Waycross, Ga.: Charles c. Jackson, Olive Springs. Tenn; Paul Bond, Brownsville, Tex; W. H. Holcombe, Win ston-Salem, N. C.; D. L. Hickling, Twin Falls, Idaho; G. F.. Vicain, Missoula, Tenn; c. A. French, Port Gibson, Miss; i; Dr. J. ". Points, New Orleans; c. S. Jenkins San Antonio, Tex; c. E. John son, Tenkawa. Okla; R. w. Dougherty, Owensboro, Ky; w. B. Asler Memphis, Tenn; M. G. Treweiller Clarksdale, Miss; J.,W. Dallison, Rector, Ark; J. c. Sul- livan, Covington. Tenn; R. E. Lee, More head City, N. G.; w. E. Holland, Abbe- vile, Ala; c. A. Snyder, Murphysburg,