Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1922-06-17

into rather thoroughly by the attorney
general, who asked if, in view of the
quantity of refuse available at the
prison, it would not have been profit
able for the state to have owned it's
hogs, to which the witness replied:
Not as compared with getting the
meat at the price we got it,"
When the attorney general ques-
toned the propriety of permitting Con-
ley to act both as seller and receiver
of the pork Mr.. Kelly said the board
checked the bills monthly as they came
in n the state accountant checked
the situation generally.
What was the purpose in putting
the sales in the name of George John
son, Jr.?" asked the attorney general.
Well replied Mr.. Kelly. Il think
the arrangement, as I discussed it at
the time, was that there would be. par
ticularly during political campaigns.
some publicity with reference to Mr..
Conley selling meat to the penitentiary,
and it was just as well to have the
bills go in in this shape. 1t is so easy
to publish, for example. that during
a year. or certain years, Conley sold
pork to the state for some thousands
of dollars, and not advise the public
that if they bought the same pork in
the market at the regular market price
it would have cost $4,000 or $4,000
more; Just as easy as it is now to go
out and make speeches to the public
that during the previous administration
the state bought so many thousands OF
dollars of hay or grain. when they did
nnf nurn a znrCa ar a nnur md % s1a
time not tell them that we had the
free use of the horses at that time"
We'll, really though, the man who
sold the pork had to make an affidavit
that it was his pork. didn't he. George
Johnson, Jr.?" asked Mr.. Rankin.
Il presume he did: l don't recall"
Did all the members of the board
know that Conley was selling pork
under the name of George johnson.
Jr.?"
Il don't know whether they did or
not. / did"
And it was your understanding that
the board generally knew"
Il suppose so; that might have been
discussed when some of the board
members were not present. / prob
ably am more responsible for that than
anybody else. myself"
AT whose suggestion was that
done?'
Pork Idea KeIIy's
Il think at my own was the reply
of Mr.. Kelly.
Mr.. Rankin then showed the witness
for pork rendered in the name
of George Johnson. Jr.. for January
and February, 1914 at 10 cents per
pound, and asked if the market price
at that time was not 10 cents. to which
the witness replied he did not remem-
Der.
He was shown another claim for pork
sold in December. 1914. at the rate of
nine cents per pound and was asked if
at that time the market price of pork
was only SGT cents. To this he re-
Piled:
II don't know but / doubt it very
much. That might have been the live
price. / know the live price
of hogs very soon after that ran up
AS high as 20 and % cents. The board
was satisfied it was getting pork at
4 figure reasonably below the market
and | do know that on several occa-
Mr.. Conley told us if we were not
with the arrangement he could
of his pork or the market and
could buy our supplies on the open
market"
He was then shown a claim for milk
sold to the prison in the name of Con-
ey & McTague, and was asked why
his sale was not put in the name of
someone else, to which he replied he
lid not know that this matter was ever
discussed by the board.
The question of the working Of con-
lets was again brought up by the de-
in the following question by
j. T. O'Connor:
Having in mind the law relative to
he employment of convicts and the
.esire of the convicts to get outside Of
he walls and the instructions to Con-
ey given by the board have you in
nind any violations by Conley of the
Nv or the instructions of the board? p"
Knows No ConIey Violations !
"None that I know Of" he replied.
When asked what Conley had to do
nth the keeping of the minutes of the
'oard, he replied that Conley had
nothing to do with any of the dere- /
Of the board regarding the ]
eeping of minutes" +,
His attention was then called to the I
wv requiring the warden to make his
esidence at the prison and was asked I
under this law the state would not s
ave been required to furnish a resi- ]
ence for Conley. I
To this the witness replied that the t
GARD would have been required to fur
ish such a residence. even though it /
as compelled to rent one. !
Ibid Conley ever present a bill for I
asked Attorney O'Connor. t
mo-" he answered, my recollection )
that Conley never presented a bill ,
II any of his personal expenses, not
zen while on his numerous trips about Q
le state or to Helena to meet with the c
board. although the custom has
been for state officials to '
,ceive their expenses while on trips G
II state purposes" v
SwiIi Agreement Made Q
As to the furnishing of the prison :
will for the feeding of Conley & :
cTague's pigs. Mr.. Kelly said this was :
a part of the general arrange
emit in force when witness went on
prison board, BY which it was con \