Indianapolis Times, Indianapolis, Marion County, 10 March 1937 — Page 2

Page PDF (11.64 MB) Locked

Back to issue view

i SL NI

wd SATE. RR Re 2 aA ea Prewa rea re

AA RR id POR OA RC J

PAGE 2

Verbatim Testimony of Judge Slack and Others in Baker Probe

SLR

THE INDIANAPOLIS TIMES

A a i a iat

NAAT ”m

ARTEL

LH ANE a ? i aha a ad

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 1937}

The verbatim testimony of | Q—Did he ever appear Pesare we ing to be selected and I : iw Withesses st the Baker In| S73 JY IB he eR UO | ro fr adit roe | vestigation yesterday follows: | Q—Do you know of any relation- ing that I was going to be apships or friendships between Joel pointed. Mr. Baker's applications | | A. Baker and Pete Cancilla? A— | were in, the Board had its official Oh, I know they always run around, meeting at the Athletic Club. I | that’s all I know. think probably the next day or so | Q—Did you see them in and about | ,¢¢er the appointment of Mr. Bel- | the court together? A—Oh, yes. zer and at that meeting Mr. Baker

CHATRMAN BEDWELL — You! + i may state your name to the Com- | Q—Conferring together? A—Oh, was selected. TI was elected _as president and after that election,

was told by hall a dozen people to | me. | T heard after I had gotten back |

W. B. SULLIVAN

| larly his application?

| what you mean by activeness . . .

| wasn't it, Judge?

come here.

Q—The committee didn't issue any subpena for you? A—No, sir. Q—Do you have any knowledge or information you can give this committee connected with Joel A. Baker and his activities in connection with the Welfare Act that was before General can not.

Assembly? A—No, sir,

Q—You weren't around the Gen- |

eral Assembly? A—No, sir. Q—And have no knowledge of any connection of Joel A. Baker with the Welfare Bill? A—No, sir. Q—Do you know Joel A. Baker? A—I know him, yes, sir. Q—How long have you know him? A—Oh, six or seven years. Q—How intimate has been your acquaintance with him? A—Oh, just talked and passed the time, something like that.

Q—Have you ever held an official

position here in Marion County? A— No, sir. | Q—You are not connected with

t , $ 3 n in! | : Apod : We ‘County wr State government in | state, Mr. Sullivan, go ahead and |I think an official in the State Bar

any way? A—No, sir, { Q—What is your business, Mr. Sullivan? A—Dressmaker. My wife | and I run a dressmaking shop. Q—Here in the City of Indianapolis? A—Yes, sir, Q—You know Pete Cancilla? A— | Yes, sir, Q—How long have you known | him? A—About four or five years. | Q—Have you had any connection | of any sort with him? A—No. | Q—You just know him? A—I just know him as one of the politicians. | Q—Here in Indianapolis? A—Yes, | SIT, (BY MR. ANDREW) —Mr. Sulli- | van, were you ever called on Grand | Jury panel in Marion County? A—! Yes, sir. | Q—In whose Baker's. Q—When were Two years ago, Q—1935? A-—VYes. sir. Q—What month in the vear? First of January. Q—First of January, 19352 A—1 think I am right on that date. It was just about two years about | now, a little earlier. I know before | the Legislature met. Q—Before the Legislature met? A—Two years ago, yes.

court? A—Frank

you called? A—

Q—What matters did you heeved

under consideration before the Grand Jury? A—Banks and several others. Q—Was Joel Baker at that time, an officer of the Marion County Criminal Court? A—Yes, sir, supposed to be, I guess he was. Q—What was his position. if vou know? A—Well, I don’t know as 1 ever did know just exactly. Q—Did he testify before the Grand Jury at that time? A—Not while 1 was there. You know we got fired. Q—What do you mean by got fired? A—Well, Frank Baker canned us out; told us we were fired. Q—After vou had been sion? A-—Yes A sir, about months. Q—After you had heard evidence

three

with relation to these bank failures? |

A—Yes, sir. Q—What banks were they? Well, very nearly all of them.

Q—What bank in particular? A—

State Savings & Trust was the first one we took up. We took that up because it was nearest limitation to run out on it. Q—Who, if any one, acted as prosecuting attorney in that grand jury investigation—whe, if any one? Heiny Goett, and Spencer was up there sometimes and they had Alva Rucker up there to tell them how. Q—Alvah Rucker was appointed as special prosecutor for those particular bank investigations? A— Yes, Sir. Q—Was he acting under appointment of Judge Baker or Herbert Spencer? A—I could not say. I don’t know. Q—What prosecutors or assistant prosecutors or deputy prosecutors appeared before the grand jury in that investigation? A— Well, there was a young lady there, stenographer. She was supposed to be a prosecutor, and Alvah Rucker was there, Heiny Goett and Spencer. Q—You say that after you were investigating three months you were fired? A—Yes, sir. Q—Were you called before the Court? A—Oh, yes. sir, and given a good lecture. Q—What I mean, were you called into the court room? A —Yes, sir. Q—And about what time? A Well, it was just before noon, I believe. Q—What, if anything, did Judge Raker say to you? A-—It is harg to tell. 1 got so mad I—well, he told us we was not doing right and we was no good, just to that effect, vou know. Just give us a general jacking up. Q—Had you at that time made any report to the Court? A—Oh, several of them. Q—About your deliberations? A —Sure, we had turned in several indictments, but they were small ones, Q—On this turned in several Judge Baker's Court? A—Yes, sir. Q—Then what did he say? A— Just canned us out, that is all there was to it. Q—What did he canned you out?

hearing you had indictments in

say when he A—Told us we

were no good; he wanted to get rid |

of us. Told us not to pay any attention to the State accounts here in the State House. He says, “They are not running this place.” We had this man Hogston over there. Trying to find out about the School Fund. That is what we had him there for, but we could not get very far. Q—Was Peter Cancilla in and about the court at that time? A—

the present session of the | 1i

in ses- |

A—|

| Q—To any other member of the . { | Grand Jury? A—Not as I know of. | that at the special session, as I | Q—That is all. A—You have not say, in March—I think it closed ' asked me quite enough gentlemen. about the 18th of March, and I | You have not got me to the right was away at that time—that at place. the special session, Mr. Baker was Q—And if you have any state-| very much interested in the passage | ment vou want to volunteer to this| of the Welfare Bill. Of course, I | committee, you may go ahead and was absent during your Special Sesdo so. A—The judge himself was in| sion, as I say, in March. I think | our way. Lit closed about the 18th of March, | | Q—State the facts. A—He told and I was away at that time. I us not to investigate anything about | 3150 knew that Mr. Baker had had | the Court House, not a word. He some personal work or had given | said, “Don’t pay any attention, that | some attention to passing out gifts | is propaganda. He called us d0OWn | guying the Christmas season, of | | there and told us that, of course. | poor people. here over in the west | . He says, “You have no right there.” | ,,.¢ of Indianapolis. I knew about | | He says, “You are “not here for | that, he was recommended by ‘quite that purpose.” That is what he told a few of our citizens here, and | us | quite a few of our good prominent | | people, that I would naturally and normally say that their recommendations were worth considerMr. Andrew)—Did youn | ation. Any Questions you want to Grand Jury | Sk Q—Had you known Mr. Baker a Q—He called you into the of-| number of years? A—I knew Mr. fice? A—Yes, sir. | Baker first when he was deputy Q—Anything further you want to | clerk of the Supreme Court and also

Q— (By Mr. Denton)—You mean he instructed you from the bench? | A—Yes, sir, and in his private | plact, too. Q— (By ever come into the room? A-—No, he never did.

state it? A—There is so much I| Association. That is when I got first am afraid I would be here until acquainted with him. tomorrow afternoon. Q—Had he been prominent in Q—Have you got any statement! political matters here in Marion pertinent to this inquiry you make? | County? A—Well, I would say that A—That is, it is-a hard thing to | he had been interested in politics in unravel, there was so much of it, Marion County to some extent. to get started on it. | Q—Was his interest in the WelQ—(by Mr. Carlson—What was fare Bill an interest from political Joel Baker's official position at that | motives or was it because he was time? A—He was supposed to be | connected with sociological work and an investigator, as I understood it.| welfare work, if you know? A—| Q—Investigator for whom? A— Well, I think that I could give my The Criminal Court. personal reason as being that in Q—Were you and your Grand which I believe Joel Baker was perJury about to make any investiga- sonally interested in public welfare tion of any local boards? A—We and in taking care of the poor peohad a bank to vote on. We were ple, and I can say now to this comready to vote on the State Savings | mittee that so far as his official acts & Trust Co.'s bank, and some way | over there were concerned and so or other the judge found out that far as the appointments of compewe was ready to vote and he called | tent people which he made in the us down and canned us out before Welfare Beard, and so far as the we did it. We had it all ready and work of the investigation and other we had been trying about three things done by the Board employees weeks to get to go into the investi- that it was satisfactory—at least 1 gation of the banks. The people haven't had any complaint. was writing us letters and telling Q—You had no knowledge that us to get on to the banks, these! he had threatened Mr. Coy. who people who lost their money. was State Director, or was in charge | [Libelous testimony omitted here.1 of the State Department of WelQ—(By Mr. Bedwell)—Let me fare, and Mr. Sheppard, to kill them ask you just one question, Mr. Sul- | or anything of that sort? A—Senaiivan. Were you investigating the! tor, I never heard of that until I Meyer-Kiser Bank? A-—Yes, sir, we read of those happenings and those | were taking that on next. We had events and unfortunate things in a whole lot of it. the newspapers. Q—Do you know whether or not Q—You knew Mr. Cancilla® A— Joel Baker had any connection with | IT knew Pete Cancella four or five the Meyer-Kiser Bank at that time? | years. A—I could not say. We had no: Q—He practiced got in that far. That was the next | here in Marion County? cne to come up. We was taking knew about his practice them up in case, before the statute courts. of limitation run out. They was Q—You knew of his close friendsparring for that all the way, and hip with Mr. Joel Baker? A—Well. we knew it and that is the reason I knew they were friendly. I knew we worked that way. they were associating with ane anQ—(By Mr. Carlson)—Waen was gther at different times. That is. the statute of limitations about to I had seen them together at difexpire on the State Bank? A—Ii ferent times. expires the next day after we g0t| Q—Did vou or did vou not have fired, whatever cay that was. any knowledge of Mr. Baker's use Q—That is on the Citizens Trust, gt intoxicants to an extreme? A— you say? A—No, State Savings & Not in the extreme, Senator. but i Trust. knew that Mr. Baker did take drinks | Q—Who all was on that grand _ jut not in the extreme. Jury, if you recall? A—Mr. Roberts oq Now if any member of this was foreman, Mr. McCrady Was committee wants to ask anv questhere, Gus Schmidt was on there; . of judee Slack— : |and a fellow by the name of Miller (By Rep. Andrew) — Judge ‘and a fellow by the name of Ott. 'giack who gid you first receive in(BY MR. ANDREW) —Q— You | f5mation from that you were to be stated that you had mo direct in- ,n.inteqd on the Marion County formation about Joel Baker and yeaifare Board? AI think really Peter Cancilla? A—Yes, sir. .. the first time I noticed it was in a Q—Did vou have any indirect in- public press. formation? A—Only thing that Q—When was the next time that understood through the gossip that ,,, ,.4 any notice—official notice | went around, they were working 10- ,. otherwise, of vour appointment? gether. That is the only thing I , 1 w,u1q sav the first official knew. . notice came from Judge Cox. aor a ES Q—Where did you get that infors y. ‘ mation? A-—J wouldn't be able to Q—(By MR. DENTON) These |, cye; that Senator. I wouldn't cases you investigated, were they Know bank embezzlement cases? A—Yes, Q—Was Sir. : A—Well, Q-—What position of law did YOU (hat phe t take on that? A—How's that? Q—What position did you take on | gu, conversation well | that, that the liabilities exceeded | Q—pid yon know wi that ‘time their assets—that was the ground! whe the ‘other members of the you were taking? A—Yes, sir. | board were to be? A—I knew who Q—Were you proceeding on the | at least three other members would | (theory that insolvency was inabil- be and then I understood that Mr. ity to pay your bills as they become | Block, I believe, was going to be one due, in the ordinary course of busi- | of the five members, but he didn't ness, or did you proceed upon the accept. In fact, I think I saw that theory that your liabilities exceeded in the newspapers, but he didn’t your assets to create insolvency? A | accept; then very close ahead of —No, the way we proceeded, the the official meeting which I believe deputy prosecutor would tell us how | occurred on April first, Mr. Belzer and what to start at, and the way | was selected. 1 think probably the to start. There was no definite day before. He hadn't been on the thing, only that we knew that the Board but a very short time when bank had went broke and we started | our first official meeting was held. | out with the intention of finding out Q—Your first official meeting was what the reason was, why, and all | held at the Indianapolis Athletic about it. I have one of the records Club? A—1J1 think the first one was | that was made by the order of | held there. | | Judge Cox on the State Savings & Q—Before that first official meet- | | Trust Co., by the experts that went | ing and organization of the Board, over the books. I have that at home. | did you have any conversation or If you want to see it, T will bring it Meeting with any other people who | ‘down and give it to you. you knew were to be members of | | WITNESS EXCUSED | that board? A—It was very likely | that I talked to Mr. Tripp, and Some of the other members about | our duties and what we had to do |and elect a director. { Q—Did you talk with Mrs. Wool- | Q. (By Chairman Bedwell)— ling? A—I may have talked with | | State your name. A—L. Ert Slack. her just before the meeting again, | Q—What is your official position? | I think I did. A—My official position now is Judge! Q-—And that during those conver- | of the Superior Court, Room 3 of sations with Mrs. Woolling or Mr. Marion County, and also President | Tripp, was the appointment of a of the Marion County Board of Director of Welfare discussed? A— Public Welfare. Oh, yes, that was discussed before Q—Judge, there has been certain we even made any motion in the | testimony before the committee in | official meeting. | connection with the Marion County | Q—Was that discussed between | | Welfare Board and Joel Bakers you and Judge Cox? A—As to the | | connection therewith. If you have appointment of a director, as to who | | any statement you want to make to |it should be? | the committee we would be glad to| Q—Yes. A—I don't believe we | have you make same. A—Well, with | had a discussion about who it was | | reference to Mr. Baker's appoint- | going to be. ment? Q—Isn’t it a fact, Judge Slack, | | Q—Well, that would be one thing, that prior to your official meeting at | (yes. A—I was in the South up the Indianapolis Athletic Club, it |

in the courts A—Yes, 1 in the

A — Everything,

it Judge Cox's office? I don’t know where it was! old me he wanted to put me on the Board, but I remember

L. ERT SLACK

| sitions in the county? {recall one now.

| the city payroll?

| the last election?

had discussed it. We had discussed | to you on any contemplated changes | sel to immediately get a final report

other applications, too. Q—You had discussed particuA—We had discussed his with others. Q—You were cognizant of the fact that Joel Baker was an active worker in the Democratic Party? A—I | know that Joel was interested in the | Democratic Partly, and had been all | his life, as to what you mean by, | Q—Well, he took an active part | in the organization and in different |

| political factions of the Democratic |

That was common knowl- |

Party. edge in and around Indianapolis, A—Well, I don't know that he was nearly as active as some of the rest of us. Q—No, but he was active? A—

| What do you mean by active, Sen-

ator? Do you mean was interested?

Q—You mean at that time he was |

probation officer or chief investigator in Judge Baker's Court? A— Yes, but I don't know of any political activity at that time. Q—You know that prior to that time he had held other official poA—I ‘don't

Q—Hadn't he been a clerk or of-

| ficer in some other county office on

A—He was on the city payroll. I put him in as purchasing agent for the City of Indianapolis when I was in the position of Mayor for two years and two months. Q—That is what IT mean. A—Yes. Rut he was not interested in politics and organization business at that time. Q—You say now your chief reason for appointing Joel A. Baker was the fact that you knew he had been active in charitable work, in and about Indianapolis? A-—VYes, I knew he had been interested in giving a great amount of gifts at

| Christmas time to the poor people | | in Indianapolis. { Q—Who was he giving them for, |

who was h.. acting for? A—I have understood . . . Q—What is your understanding about that? Who had he been active for? A—Now, my answer was going to be before your interruption, that I had information that really there were some people here that had means and money that would turn that over to him so that he could give out baskets along at

_ Christmas time to a number of | people in Indianapolis. | understood, I won't say I knew,

I knew, or

I understood that trucking companies furnished him trucks free of

charge that he might make the de-| ;,qoes? A—No, nor individually, no. |

liveries, and I knew he had done that for three or four Christmas periods prior to the time this special session created Board of Indiana. Q—Who were furnished that money? your

the people that

information on that?

Well, T would have to tell you what

my information was, and name people who I don’t know whether they

want to have their names given or | ‘not, in this investigation.

Q—Were they active in the Demo- | Q—VYes.

cratic organization in Marion County? A—No, the two persons I would have to name to you, Senator, were both of them Republicans. Q—Active in politics? A—No, not either one of them are active in politics, but were giving gifts to various people in Indianapolis, and various organizations. Q-—You say that was the chief reason for appointing Joel A. Baker as Director of Public Welfare of Marion County? A-—That was ane of the chief reasons, ves. Q—His active interest in welfare work? A—I think he was actively interested and sincerely interested in it. Q—Did the fact that he had been your purchasing agent during your term as Mayor of Indianapolis have

{anything to do with it? A—It sat-

isfied me that he was honest, it satisfied me that he had business ability; it satisfied me that he was

‘a fellow that would do his work in

a public place sincerely and honestly, and faithfully. Q—You knew at the time you appointed him the criticism and charges that had been levied against him as purchasing agent under your administration? A—I knew that at the close of the administration in the political campaign that the Republicans that something had gone wrong and then T knew the City Council, on my request made an immediate investigation of it and reported there was notihng unlawful or wrong about it. I knew that. Q—Now, you say you are acquainted with Pete Cancilla? Yes, 1 know Mr. Cancilla. Q—He is acting in the capacity of receiver in one or two cases in your court? A—He was appointed receiver in one case. Q—Is he acting at this time? A—1 don’t know whether he is acting as receiver now, but he still has the appointment. Q—The appointment has not been revoked? A—Not officially revoked by me. That is. I have not entered

| it of record. The report is going to

be filed this week; final report, Q—Following the election in 1936, did you have knowledge of the fact that Joel Baker left the city after A—Well, yes, 1 have knowledge that there was a time there, Senator, when Mr. Baker was out of Indianapolis, on a trip, a pleasure trip. Q—California? A—I don't know. I believe he did go to California. That is my information. Q—He was gone for perhaps five weeks? A—I don’t know how long. Q—Did he apply to your president of the Board for leave of absence or tell you he was going on a vacation? A-—I think he prob-

ably told me he was going away on |

a vacation, but I don’t believ was brought before the Board. Q—Never brought officially before the Board? A—I don’t believe it

e it

was taken up officially before the |

Board, except the time he was away, the Board knew about it at a meeting. A—Did he draw full pay while he was gone? A—Personally, I don’t know because the Board don’t sign the pay warrants nor checks or anything. Q—But you have never taken any official action on your Board that might indicate he was on a vacation, without or with pay? A—The Board has not acted officially on that subject matter. The statute the special session passed allows them to fix that.

[in the Welfare Act of 1936?

started an issue |

A= |

All the time, running around there. until about the 23d of March last was decided betwzen you and other Q—Did he hold any official posi- year, and then was out of In- members of the Welfare Board that tion in the court? A—One time I dianapolis for Thursday, Friday, Joel Baker was to be the director + nnderstood; I would not say for Saturday and Sunday, and then I of the Marion County Welfare rue, for I don’t know, he was sup- | think our official meeting was on Board? A—I would not say that 3 to be a deputy prosecutor in the first of April. When I came we had decided it. joe Williams court. | back, I understood that I was go- | 3 » Ne idenary

oe -

an 2 ER

vm. aE

Q—You had discussed it? A—We |

Ae He has never discussed that subject with me at any time. Q—Did you have any information, official or otherwise, that Joel Baker and Pete Cancilla were in-

terested in any pending legislation |

before this assembly? A—Nothing

only what newspapers said in the | publications about them being down |

here at the State House. Q—Well, it was a matter, as you know now, in which your board was interested? mean? Q—I mean as it might affect the

Marion County Welfare setup. A—I |

can only answer that personally. Q—I say you know now that that

| pending legislation did affect the A—I1 knew |

Marion County setup. | that. I read it in the newspapers. | Q—I say, you have that informa- | tion now? A—O, yes. {| Q=—You did not have that in-

| formation prior to this? A—Oh, I

| had what the newspapers said about |

| the change and putting Marion | County in one class. | newspapers. | Q—Did Joel ever consult with the | board about that? A-—He did not. | Q-—Did he ever seek any advice { from the board as to what posi- | tion he should take as an agent of | your board? A—He never discussed that nor did the board discuss it | nor did the members individually | discuss it, so far as I personally | know. Q—In other words, you have no | knowledge. official or otherwise, of any activity of Joel Baker or Pete

Cancilla, as affecting welfare legis- |

| lation? A—Not at all, Senator. | Q-—Had you at any time given to | Joel A. Baker instructions that he | was authorized to act for you before the Legislature in any capacity? | A—T never gave him that officially | or personally. Q—When was the last time you saw Joel Baker, Judge? | not seen him since this unfortunate | event here with reference to Mr. | Coy at all. Now how long it was before that that 1 saw Mr. Baker I would not be able to say. It might have been five days. It might have been 10 aays. I did see him. Q—Did you ever attend a meeting with other judges when Joel Baker was present within the last two weeks? A—No.

{

| Q—Did you ever have a meeting

where you discussed this assault upA—Never any disboard meeting |

| on Wayne Coy? but | y y

cussion with—any you mean? Q—No meeting with some other |

—-Have you heard from Joel

| Baker on the telephone since that | time? the Welfare |

| communications from | have not.

What is | A= the present time? Q—Do you have any reason know- { ing why he left town?

A—I have not. Q—Have vou reecived anv written him? A-—I

Q—Do you know where he is at A—I do not.

A—No. Q—Have you made any effort to get in contact with him? A-—Have I made personally? A—No effort at all.

| Q—When was the last time you

| saw Peter Cancilla? A—Well, I | would not know but I have a recol-

| lection though, that sometime after |

| the Senate was in session that I came down here one day, and just droppd in, because I am a little in- | terested in the Indiana State Sen- | ate, and at that time I saw Mr.

| |

{ed him. I saw a number of others | and greeted them. That is all the | business IT had down here. Not a

| word was said about the welfare

| was down here for or anything of

| that kind. Neo conversation. Just | greetings to different people. Q—Judge, I expect you are cog- | nizant of the testimony we have had before this committee about the disappearance of Bill 173 and the attack on Coy. A—Yes, I have read that.

A—-What do you

I read the

A—1 have |

the | Board by way of motion? | was a motion put throug

| Baker, just spoke to him and greet- |

| legislation or about what Mr. Baker

| Q—Who is counsel for Cancilla? | A—Counsel—well it was Mr. Karrer and Mr. Peden and there was another firm at the time of the ap-

pointment of Mr. Cancilla in Court | at the time he was appointed. I|

have informed all of them. In fact, I have informed them to stop the payment of funds out of the bank, | which has been done. And Mr. Can- | cilla’s appointment, Senator, was done by counsel saying that they | had agreed upon him as the receiver to be appointed and I appointed him when they told me that.

Q—Judge, it has been testified by other witnesses that there are about 85 employees in the Department of Public Welfare of Marion County. Is {that right? A—I think that is ap- | proximately the number. | Q—You mean now? {don't know how many right now {but I believe there was even more |than that. That is, when we started [to investigate the Marion County | Welfare, appropriatons that was made by the County Commissioners. We had about 4000 or 4500 of | those to investigate. At that time | the investigators were quite numerous. Then they were reduced later.

Q—It has also been testified by { previous witnesses that a large num- | ber of these appointees were made by Joel Baker personally? A—VYes, that is true. Q—With the express approval of the Board? A—I think in the early appointments or employments, as we will say, that Mr. Baker reported who he was selecting to the Board at the first three or four meetings. Q—After those three or four first | monthly meetings then the subsequent employees were appointed by him without further action by the Board, isn't that a fact? A—I think certain employees were employed by him that the Board did not know ‘anything about and did not know anything about for some time. Q—Was that action taken with express approval after the A—There

A—Yes.

of the Board meetings in which a motion or resolution went through in substance that Mr. Baker should be permitted to continue employing

and discharging persons that he

| brought in on the work.

Q—Who made that motion, if you recall? A—I do not recall but it was made by one of the members on the Board and show, Q—Was there any discussion of that motion as you recall, in the way of opposition to it? A—I think when the resolution was read that

[it had the word “fire” in it and I

said that I did not like the word “fire” and that it ought to be the word “discharge.”

Q—Was there any opposition? A— |

'T believe that is about all that was | said. I did not like the word “fire,” | although the minutes probably will {not show that I made that, but I | believe I did.

| that particular word, was there any | opposition to the general blanket

| authority sought to be conveyed to | ment of Joel Baker as director and | A—1 among the members what ought to

| Mr. Baker by this resolution to employ and discharge employees without further notice? A—I don’t re-

| call any, although there might have |

been a word or two said. Q—Do you know who might have made the opposition? A—No, 1

to hold anybody responsible.

Q-—Now, you have stated that—. but IT may have been the first one | | A—Let me modify that statement. I on the board to mention Joel Bak-

| | |

Q—Your board does not approve |

| of those activities? | approve of them. | board does not. Q—Has your Board ever taken any action on it? A—No. Q—As I understand vou. these | activities by Baker and Cancilla | were unauthorized? A-—I should say | yes indeed. | Q—Your Board does not approve what was done? A—I can only [answer for myself. I must not an|swer for the board as a board, but | will answer for myself and say plainly and distinctly that I do not | approve of it at all. | Q—And nothwithstanding your past friendship for Mr. Baker, vou | will agree with us the activities in | this respect were very reprehensi- | ble, speaking for yourself? A—Well, | now, I do not know all the facts in | the bill, the loss of the bill. | Q—Let me change that a little | bit. Let me qualify that. A—I would {rather you would. | You are familiar with the | testimony that we received belore | this Committee. A—Yes, 1 have read | quite a lot of it.

I am

A—I do not sure the

Q—And the testimony that we

| have here, you will agree that the | acts were very reprehensible? A— | Well, the attack on Mr. Coy, of | course, is just—I would say, repre- | hensible and a lot of other adjec- | tives. With reference to the loss of | the House Bill, though, and Mr. | Downey and Mr. Baker's action with regard to that I do not know enough | about the facts to say whether or | not that was wrong or right. fact, 1 would not want to criticise | the House nor the Representative | for loaning it or handing it or what- | ever happened. | was a tragedy, yes. Q—Of course, you are a former | member of the Indiana Senate? A— |I am a former member of both | House and Senate and I do not {want to criticise either one.

| lature feels about both of these matters? A—I believe I do from what I see in the newspapers. yes. (I have personal opinions about | whether or not a chairman of a committee should do this or that, but I do not think my opinion would be worth anything to your Committee or to the general public. Q—We are both interested in this phase. A—I know but I do not want to make your decision on these matters. That is up to the Commit-

verdict. Q—Judge, you stated that a final | report will be filed in the receivership matter in which Cancilla is receiver. You don’t mean it will be filed by him, do you? A—I do not | but I told the counsel in the case immediately after I saw this account printed in the papers, I told coun-'

Q—You appreciate how the Legis- |

tee to make the decision, the final |

In|

I do not know |

{ |

h at one; )jttle less than th

Q—-There was an additional fee | allowed to Mr. Cancilla’s counsel? |

the minutes would |

vour family.

said I do not want to hold anybody responsible. I mean, I do not want to accuse some one of saying some- | thing unless I know absolutely that | they did say it and I do not recall {any member of the Board opposing lor saying that they opposed the (passage of that motion. | Q=—You stated before, Judge, that

| Peter Cancilla was acting as receiver |

|in a case in your Court. A—VYes. Q—Was that a theater receiver-

buildings. Q—And did Mr. Cancilla receive a fee for his services in connection with that? A—He did, or at least he was allowed a fee. I do not know whether he has taken it or not. Q—What was the amount of the fee? A—The amount of the fee was | $3000. Q—And for how long a time did Mr. Cancilla serve as receiver? A— I would not say how long but it | was probably five, six or seven weeks, | something like that. Q—Did he have any extensive duties in connection with this receivership? A—I can describe one thing that was done that seemed to me to be important, in the way of work that he did, and his attorneys and other counsel. They got the first bid in, I think at about the appraised value of the property and when that bid came in I did not think it was enough. We did not

other bids to come in and in the

land 1 considere | portant, | Q—The original appraisal, was (that considered a fair cash value of {the property at the time? A—The | appraiser said it was. There was | never any objection to the allow(ance of the'fees of the receiver or | attorney by any of the attorneys, stockholders, preferred or other- | wise or | been. Q—What was the value of the | property involved in that receiver- | ship? A—I think it sold at about | $45,000. I am not certain of the exact figure. I think it was about (that. I think it was appraised { around $25,000 or $23,000. Maybe at.

{

| fund I do not know. That is why | cide it.

| I am asking a final report.

ship? A—Yes, there is a theater in |

the property but there is also store |

| in

er’s application and to say that I would be willing, ready to appoint him. I may have been the first one that said that. But, of course, I think the motion was undoubtedly made by some other member of the board and seconded by some other member of the board, because I had been elected president and I don’t believe I made any motion at any time while I was president or offered any resolution. Q—(By Mr. Andrew)-—Just one more question, Judge. If you had knowledge of the fact that we had evidence before this committee that on the day of the attack on Wayne Coy, and immediately prior thereto, Joel Baker was in the taproom of the Harrison Hotel, with one Peter ‘Cancilla, and that while there, they had three drinks of whisky, and up= on leaving the taproom, Peter

| Cancilla was heard to say, in the

presence of Joel Baker, “I have got a little job to do,” that they ime mediately left there and went to the State House, where they were seen and about the corridors of the House and Senate, in company of each other that immediately following the attack on Wayne Coy by Peter Cancilla, they returned to the taproom of the Harrison Holel and were seen there together by witnesses, and at that time they took four drinks of whisky, would you, or would you not say that that conduct was reprehensible on the

approve the first bid. We permitted |

part of Joel Baker? A—I would say that it was unwise of him to take

course of 10 days or two weeks they Grinky in thal wae. had gotten bids up, increased about | $15,000 or $16,000 over the first bid | d that quite im- |

Q—Wouldn't you think that he would have made some effort if he had knowledge of an attack to be made upon Wayne Coy, and if he

[ had such knowledge, to take steps to

{ on Wayne Cov.

their counsel. Never has |

{ | | | |

n | tp 9 allowed to Mr. Cancilla’s counsel? ‘rue’

| any

| |

stop such an attack? A-—My personal feeling about Joel Baker would be that he would not have approved Pete Cancilla making that attack That is my personal opinion about it—Well, even now it is. Q—If there was evidence before is committee, as there has been evidence, that Joel Baker threatened one Virgil She, pard, that if he did not stop his activities with reference to the Marion County Welfare Board, he would kill him, would

| you think that conduct on the part.

of Joel Baker was reprehensible, or not? A—Your question assumes that that is true and authentic, and asks my opinion on it. Q—Assuming that that evidence is before this board and that was A—Assuming that that was true, you want my opinion as to whether or not it was true? 1 say it was terribly wrong if it was true. Q—1I take it that you don't bhelieve that it was true? A—I haven't opinion on it either way. 1 have never formed an opinion about it—no, sir, that is why I cannot answer vou definitely, as 1 would like to, Senator. In fact, if I were the judge and had the evidence before me, I would not hesitate to deDenton) —Between

Q— (By Mr.

Q—Has all the property been | the time of this attack on Coy, and | sold in that receivership? A—I think | the exposure in the newspapers of

there was only ne property in the the loss of Senate Bill 173, and the

| receivership and that was the prop- | erty that was sold.

| passage of this second welfare bill | by the House and Senate, did your

Q-—Judge Slack at the first meet- board undertake to take any dis~

Q—Outside of the discussion of |ing of the Welfare Board, I will ask | ciplinary action against Baker? A--

| you whether or not you were the|No, the board did not have any

|one who suggested

| requested his appointment?

| was one of the four members that | be done about it?

the appoint- meeting at all.

Q—Was there any discussion

A—No discus=

| favored him and suggested that he | sion among the members, no, be-

point.

would be a proper person to ap-|

cause the new Jaw was the very | thing that was up, and personally

Q—Were you the one who placed | I did not want to come down here

| his name in nomination?

A—Offi- | and offer any influence against tha would not say. Really I do not want | cially, I think the motion was made | new law that I understood was tha

| by another member of the board, | bill that was taken.

Q—Just one other thing, Peter (Turn to Page Four)

Watch Your Doorstep TODAY

Read every page!

0 inexpensively.

... for our exciting 12-page Easter Fashion Circular. It's full of news that will be of interest to every member of Then come to Ayres Downstairs Store prepared to outfit your entire family from head to foot—in the smartest outfits they ever owned ... and so-

If you don’t receive your circular by 5:30 Wednesday, call RI. 4311, and a messenger will deliver one without charge.

TOS

lif

ownstairs at Ayres

... Where Correct Fashions Are Less Expensive!

AO AE me