The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1922-07-06
VERMILLION NOT INVOLVED IN HATS DEALS,
r SOME BELIEVE FORTUNE IS HIDDEN AWAY

In an article in the indianapolis
| News, w. E. Blodgett discussing the
Edgar F. Hiatt case says:
RICHMOND, Ind, July Cone of
IL indictments returned here recently
against Edgar F. Hiatt, former presi-
dent of the Dickinson Trust company,
OF this city, charges that Hiatt en-
oezzled certain sums of money for the
use and benefit of Jesse Vermillion.
Mr.. Vermillion, who is the president
OF the Anderson Banking company,
dld not benefit from the use of the
Dickinson Trust company's funds.
Back OF this particular Indictment is
the story of the Brock building, at An
derson. Through various deals one G..
B. McLemore, Of Greenville, Miss. be-
came possessed of property in Ander-
son, Ind, and Hiatt bought that prop
erty from McLemore in a series of
deals. On Jan. %, 1922, Hiatt, as
president of the Dickinson Trust com
pany, issued a check for $4,000 to
Jesse Vermillion. and on Jan. 81, 1922,
issued another for $4,000, also pay
able to Mr. Vermillion. This money
was paid to Mr.. McLemore, and Mr..
Vermillion had nothing to do with it
except to handle it in the regular
course of the business of his bank.
On Sept. 26, 1921, Hiatt, as presi-
dent of the Dickinson Trust company,
issued check payable to McNally,
Peck & Co., of Chicago. for 100000
Neither the grand jury nor any one
who investigated the affairs of the
bank have been able to ascertain what
this check was for or what deal of
Hiatt's it represented.
Chicago Firm in Transaction
Clyde L. Peck, of Chicago, figures
all through the indictments against
Hiatt as the agent for the former
president of the Dickinson Trust COM
pany in making numerous deals in real
estate. He was the member of the
firm of McNally, Peck and company,
a concern in which Hiatt was also an
officer. Several years ago Hiatt made
deal for some Jackson county Ianu
which proved bad investment for the
bank. AS the result of that deal, Hiatt
became possessor of some land in
Starke county, Indiana, and Peck was
the agent that helped dispose of the
land. Hiatt sold the Starke county
land to McNally, Peck and company.
McNally, Peck and company negotiat-
ed deal whereby Martin Meehan. OF
Burlington, Ia, a brewer, bought the
land In Starke county and traded it
10 Clyde Blair for piece of property
at 6557 Kenwood avenue, Chicago.
Blair traded this property to Hiatt,
and in the deal Hiatt gave Martin
Moehn check for $7,120, and one
OF the indictments against Hiatt
charges him with embezZling. that
amount of money in favor of Martin
Moehan. The property, after Hiatt
got IL, was not in good condition, and
Herman Olsen received a contract
practlcally to rebuild the property
one or the indictments against Hiatt
charges that he embezzled S85,475.S5j
Tor the use and benefit of Herman Oh
sen. Olsen was simply contractor
on the building and the money he re-
celved was to pay for his work. and
ne old not know the source of the
money that Hiatt sent to him from
time to time
Checks to BROKERAGE Firm
Hiatt also obtained two additional
chicago properties known as the
Sheridan road property and the Tudor
apartment property, and he is charged
IN indictments with embezzline S225
600 to pay for this property. Various
indictments charge that at different
times c. L. Peck and company receiv-
ed checks, one for $l35, 600, one for
$4,000, one for $4,000, one for Sc. 600
and checks for various smaller sums
These checks were for money thar
was used in the Chicago real estate !
deals, which were negotiated by Clvde
l.. Peck, c. L. Peck and company. and
McNally, Peck and company, Mr.
Peck's statement to the investigating
committee is that he did not know
that Hiatt was using the funds of the
Dickinson Trust company in the yari- !
Gus deals and transactions made by
Peck and his companies and that he |
thought that Hiatt was a man of great i
wealth. 1t is understood that Peck
provided a great deal of information
that will be of Importance when Hiatt |
goes on trial. Peck was not alone in
the thought that Hiatt was a man of |
considerable means, although he did
not make an ostentatious display of
wealth. He was very quiet and re-