Rensselaer Republican, Volume 26, Number 14, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 30 November 1893 — MCDONALD AND THE OTHERS FOUND GUILTY. [ARTICLE]

MCDONALD AND THE OTHERS FOUND GUILTY.

The trial of the officers of the Guarantee Investment Company, an institution well known in this vicinity, was concluded last Wednesday in Chicago. George M. McDonald, the president of the company, and two Other officers were convicted, of conducting a lottery, or rather of using the mails in conducting one. The fact that Mr. McDonaid is so well known in this vicinity, from his many visits while a property owner here, gives the case a special interest to our readers; and we give herewith the Inter Ocean's account of the closing incidents of the trial. It is not often that the United States Court room is so crowded as it was yesterday during the closing scenes of the trial of the indicted officers of the Guarantee Investment Company. Intense interest has been manifested in the case from the beginning and it reached its height during the delivery of the Judge’s ch argeto the jury. In this charge Judge Grosscup plainly expressed his opinion of the Guarantee Investment Company. Be practically decided that it was a lottery of the very worst kind and all but instructed the jury to return a verdict of guilty, which it . did in a very short time. The convicted persons are: George W. McDonald, President; William H. Btev c nson, Vice President and Treasurer, and Francis M. Swearingen, Secretary. Director J. P.' Johnson was also named as guilty, but ex-Judge Collins explained that he had never been arrested or arranged, and So his case was nolle pressed by District Attorney Milchrist Bail “Was fixed at SIOOO for Stevenson and Swearington and SSOOO for McDonald. Sentence was not pronounced by Judge Gfosscup, but will be in a few dajs. The maximum penalty in a SIOOO fine or one year in the penitentiary or both, as the Court may decide. v In his charge to the jury Judge Grasscup taid: ~~v. ' , “There is no doubt that th? scheme on the face of it, according

to its own contract, is a cheat The.-testimony shows that this company has been in existence for two years, and has had 50,025 applications. According to the contract of its organization it has therefore received more than half a million dollars from the $lO preliminary fees and it has paid $206,000 to its bondholders. If it paid out all it received for that purpose, and its contract required it so to do, it received from the dues more than $40,000. So that after two years the stockholders received more than $540,000 and the so-called beneficiaries received but $206,000. This is public plunder. It is said that this has been done fairly. This court is not sitting to pass upon the fairness of any such transaction.”