The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1922-06-05
Money Seemed To Have Lost
Its " ay to City Treasury.
Attorney Generals Office Digs
Up Police Sensation.
.BLITz AND LEE ENDORSE CHECK
No Record of One Speeding
Fine Paid by ]. W. Flickenger.
City Attorney May Bring Suit
To Recover Cash Due.

Lawsuits to collect money which
may have t1ost it's way" between NE
police department and the city treas
ury may be started in the near future,
torney.
C. C. Knowlton. Topeka's city audi
tor, this afternoon began a check of
the police books TO ascertain If there
are any cases in which offenders have
paid fines and the money not turned
into the treasury. The attorney gen
erals office, while it has not made a
check of the police dockets, has found
three or four instances which appear
questionable and which lead to the
belief that there may be a consider
able amount of money for the CITY to
recover thru the medium of lawsuits.
One of these cases was that of J.
W. Flickenger, who was arrested Aug
ust Z, 1921, for speeding. F'lickenger
made a sworn affidavit as follows:
Il was arrested by an officer for
speeding August Z, 1921. I put up a
Rad Lee afterwards and Lee told me
that my fine would be the minimum,
$40 | then gave him check on Au-
gust s. 1921 for SO and took up the
SO check
The peculiar thing about this check
was that when it returned to Flick
enger thru the clearing house that it
bore the endorsement of r. NJ. Lee
and under that I. NJ. Blitz. According
to the attorney general the records
do not show that the $40 fine ever
went into the city treasury.
A S25 Liquor Case.
Then there was the case of James
Stansbury, of North Topeka, who was
arrested for having liquor in his pos
session. c. B. Griffith, assistant at
torney general, called Stansbury to
the witness stand during the prelim-
mary hearing of Blitz in the court of
Topeka Friday AND Stansbury stated
that BIitz told him that his fine would
be $25 and that he paid that amount
to Blitz. He was never called into
police court again. he said Griffith
also has Stansbury's check, bearing
the endorsement of I. NJ. Blitz.
Griffith also brought up at the Blitz
hearing the case OF fG1laries Adds,
DECORATOR. 1133 Kansas avenue, who
was "a rrested when a raid was made
on his house and liquor found in
p possession of one of his roomerS. Ad-
dis testified that BlitZ also handled
his case He said he gave Blitz S25
him 500 more on 'Blitz's promise that
he would settle the case and that
there would be no newspaper no
toriety. The police docket entry, ac-
cording to Griffith, shows that Adds
was fined 800 and paroIed. Adds
said ne was never called into court
and it is asserted that no fine in that
case ever reached the city treasury.
City Attorney O'Nei said he could
make no estimate at the present time
whether or not there was money due
the city from police court cases.
I'VE are going to check up" he
stated, "and if we find any such cases
we are going to bring suit to collect
such money as may be due the city,
"O'Neil said the city could sue only
on such cases. if any, where the money
had actually been paid for a fine, but
the money had failed to reach the city.
-
maintained against Blitz for money
which certain persons are alleged to
have paid him, even where such per-
sons actually believed they were pay
ing a fine.
However" the city attorney ex-
planned, those persons who paid Blitz
such money in good faith could bring
suit against him to recover it,