Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Taylorology Issue 25
*****************************************************************************
* T A Y L O R O L O G Y *
* A Continuing Exploration of the Life and Death of William Desmond Taylor *
* *
* Issue 25 -- January 1995 Editor: Bruce Long bruce@asu.edu *
* TAYLOROLOGY may be freely distributed *
*****************************************************************************
CONTENTS OF THIS ISSUE:
The Court-Martial of Edward Sands
Wallace Smith: February 22, 1922
*****************************************************************************
What is TAYLOROLOGY?
TAYLOROLOGY is a newsletter focusing on the life and death of William Desmond
Taylor, a top Paramount film director in early Hollywood who was shot to
death on February 1, 1922. His unsolved murder was one of Hollywood's major
scandals. This newsletter will deal with: (a) The facts of Taylor's life;
(b) The facts and rumors of Taylor's murder; (c) The impact of the Taylor
murder on Hollywood and the nation. Primary emphasis will be given toward
reprinting, referencing and analyzing source material, and sifting it for
accuracy.
*****************************************************************************
*****************************************************************************
The Court-Martial of Edward Sands
Edward F. Snyder, alias Edward Sands, was one of the prime suspects in the
Taylor murder (see TAYLOROLOGY #19). In 1915, during his first enlistment in
the United States Navy, he was court-martialed for fraud and embezzlement.
The following are extracts from the court-martial record.
*****************************************************************************
Case of Edward F. Snyder, Yeoman, first class, U.S. Navy.
November 22, 1915.
Record of Proceedings
of a
GENERAL COURT-MARTIAL
convened at
The Navy Yard, Portsmouth, N.H.
by order of
The Secretary of the Navy
*****************************************************************************
File No. 26251-11261
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY,
Washington, November 3, 1915.
Sir:
Edward F. Snyder, yeoman first class, United States Navy, will be tried
before the general court-martial of which you are judge advocate, upon the
following charges and specifications.
You will notify the president of the court accordingly, inform the
accused of the date set for his trial, and summon all witnesses, both for the
prosecution and for the defense:
CHARGE I.
FRAUD, IN VIOLATION OF ARTICLE EIGHT OF THE ARTICLES FOR
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE NAVY.
SPECIFICATION.
In that Edward F. Snyder, a yeoman first class in the United States
Navy, while attached to and serving on board the United States ship PADUCAH,
and assigned to duty as ship's store yeoman of the said vessel, and by virtue
of such assignment, employed and service being charged with the care, custody
and sale of stores in said ship's store, did sell, knowingly and fraudulently
and with intent to defraud other persons in the Navy, at various times
between the twentieth day of January, nineteen hundred and fifteen, and the
eighth day of September, nineteen hundred and fifteen, on board the said
ship, to certain men belonging to the crew of said ship, for amounts in
excess of the prices lawfully authorized by the pay officer of the said ship,
certain articles from the ship's store, as follows, to wit: Life Buoy soap,
chocolate almond bars, pennants, William's shaving sticks, Pebecco tooth
paste, Bull Durham tobacco, Cashmere soap, Electro Silicon, Bicycle playing
cards, Colgate's tooth paste, fountain-pen ink, peanut butter, Prince Albert
tobacco, Epicure tobacco, P.G. soap, Torrey razors, Durham Duplex razors, and
fountain pens; thereby making fraudulent overcharges amounting in the
aggregate to one hundred dollars, United States money, or thereabouts.
CHARGE II
EMBEZZLEMENT, IN VIOLATION OF ARTICLE FOURTEEN OF THE
ARTICLES FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE NAVY.
SPECIFICATION.
In that Edward F. Snyder, a yeoman first class in the United States
Navy, while attached to and serving on board the United States ship PADUCAH,
and assigned to duty as ship's store yeoman of the said vessel, and by virtue
of such assignment, employed and service being charged with the care, custody
and sale of stores in said ship's store, having sold, knowingly and
fraudulently and with intent to defraud other persons in the Navy, at various
times between the twentieth day of January, nineteen hundred and fifteen, and
the eighth day of September, nineteen hundred and fifteen, on board the
aforesaid ship, to certain men belonging to the crew of said ship, certain
articles from the ship's store, as follows, to wit: Life Buoy soap, chocolate
almond bars, pennants, William's shaving sticks, Pebecco tooth paste, Bull
Durham tobacco, Cashmere soap, Electro Silicon, Bicycle playing cards,
Colgate's tooth paste, fountain-pen ink, peanut butter, Prince Albert
tobacco, Epicure tobacco, P.G. soap, Torrey razors, Durham Duplex razors, and
fountain pens; thereby making fraudulent overcharges amounting in the
aggregate to one hundred dollars, United States money, or thereabouts, and
he, the said Snyder, having received into his possession the said amount in
overcharge, did knowingly and fraudulently misappropriate and apply to his
own use and benefit the said amount of one hundred dollars, United States
money, or thereabouts, lawful money of the United States.
/s Josephus Daniels
Secretary of the Navy
*****************************************************************************
First Day.
Navy Yard, Portsmouth, N.H.
Monday, November 22, 1915
The court met at 10:30 a.m.
Present:
Commander John V. Klemann, U.S. Navy,
Paymaster Ben D. McGee, U.S. Navy,
Captain John A. Hughes, U.S. Marine Corps,
Passed Assistant Surgeon Edward V. Valz, U.S. Navy, and
First Lieutenant Frederick R. Hoyt, U.S. Marine Corps,
Members, and Second Lieutenant Arthur J. White, U.S. Marine Corps,
Judge Advocate.
N.O. Foust, stenographer, entered.
The accused entered and stated that he wished to have C.W. Ford and
C.H. Brown, of Boston, Mass., act as his counsel; the request was granted and
counsel entered.
The judge advocate read the precept, copy appended, marked "A", and
also a letter from the Navy Department, dated November 15, 1915, copy
appended, marked "B".
The accused stated that he did not object to any member present.
The judge advocate, each member, and the stenographer, were duly sworn.
The accused stated that he had received a copy of the charges and
specifications preferred against him about November 1, 1915.
The court was cleared.
When opened, all parties to the trial entered, and the president
announced that the court found the charges and specifications in due form and
technically correct.
The accused stated that he was ready for trial.
No witnesses were present.
The judge-advocate read the letter of transmittal, and the charges and
specifications, original prefixed, marked "1" and "2", and arraigned the
accused as follows:
Q. Edward F. Snyder, yeoman, first class, United States Navy, you have
heard the charges and specifications of charges preferred against you; how
say you to the specification of the first charge, guilty or not guilty?
A. Not guilty.
Q. To the first charge, guilty or not guilty?
A. Not guilty.
Q. To the specification of the second charge, guilty or not guilty?
A. Not guilty.
Q. To the second charge, guilty or not guilty?
A. Not guilty.
The prosecution began.
A witness for the prosecution entered and was duly sworn.
Examined by the judge-advocate.
1.Q. What is your name, rank and present station?
A. E.H. Barber, Assistant Paymaster, U.S. Navy, on special
temporary duty at the Navy Yard, Portsmouth, N.H.
2.Q. As whom do you recognize the accused?
A. As Snyder, yeoman first class, U.S. Navy.
3.A. Do you recognize the accused as having been attached to and
serving on board the U.S.S. PADUCAH?
A. Yes sir; he was serving on board the PADUCAH in the capacity
of ship's store and clothing yeoman from January 20th,
approximately, to September 8, 1915.
4.Q. How was the accused so serving in the capacity of yeoman in
charge of the ship's store; what instructions did the accused work under as
regarding the selling of articles in the ship's store?
A. Well, instructions were contained in the Pay Officer's Manual
for conducting the ship's store. He was furnished with a price
list, and told to keep it posted.
5.Q. By whom was the accused furnished with this price list that you
mention?
A. By myself.
6.Q. Where was the price list kept, or supposed to be kept?
A. A copy was placed on the ship's bulletin board. The original
price list was posted on the ship's store right near the door.
7.Q. Were there any other copies, and where were they kept?
A. One copy was given to the ward-room, and one furnished to the
commanding officer.
8.Q. Can you remember, at the present time, the prices as established
by you, of the various articles contained in the store?
A. No, I cannot remember.
9.Q. Have you in your possession any memoranda, or any record, of
these prices which were in effect during the time the accused was in charge
of the ship's store?
A. I have the original ship's store ledger, which is in the
hand-writing of the accused, which contains the official price
list.
The judge-advocate stated that if there was no objection by the
accused, he would like to submit the original record of these prices to the
witness so that he might testify as to the prices for the various articles
sold in the ship's store.
Question by counsel for the accused:
"Do I understand that the witness kept this himself?"
Answer by the witness:
"Yes sir. The entries on the ledger were made by the accused."
Question by the judge-advocate:
"Do you object to the witness being supplied with this memoranda
in order to refresh his memory?"
Counsel for the accused:
"No, I do not."
The judge-advocate submitted the ledger to the court, stating that the
ledger was the memoranda from which the prices for articles, cost and selling
prices, were taken.
The court had no objection to submitting the ledger as requested.
Examined by the judge-advocate.
10.Q. Do you recognize this book as the ledger kept by the ship's store
yeoman under your supervision?
A. I do.
11.Q. From the memoranda in your possession, state the selling prices
of the following articles: Life Buoy Soap?
A. Four cents a cake.
12.Q. Chocolate almond bars?
A. Three cents each.
13.Q. Pennants?
A. Fifty-five cents each.
14.Q. William's Shaving sticks?
A. Twelve cents.
15.Q. Pebecco Tooth Paste?
A. Thirty-two cents.
16.Q. Fountain-pen ink?
A. Thirteen cents.
17.Q. Did you have fountain-pen ink at other prices?
A. No sir.
18.Q. Peanut butter?
A. Seven cents.
19.Q. Prince Albert Tobacco?
A. Eight cents.
20.Q. Epicure tobacco?
A. Eight cents.
21.Q. P.G. Soap?
A. Four cents.
22.Q. Torrey razors?
A. Eight-eight cents each.
23.Q. Durham Duplex razors?
A. $3.96.
24.Q. Fountain pens?
A. That all depends on the size; do you want the price list of
fountain pens?
25.Q. Yes.
A. Fountain pens, 20 S.F., Bakelight, self-filling, $2.48;
number 20-1/2 J.K., $1.65; number 18, Parker pen, $1.49.
26.Q. The accused is charged with having committed certain offenses,
between January, 1915 and September, 1915; state what you know of the
circumstances?
A. Well, after the inventory on September 8th--it was about
September 10th or 12th, I went to the ship's store one night to
get a box of cigars, and one of the members of the crew wanted
to know if he could buy...some almond bar. I told him that I
did not have a price list.
Counsel for the accused:
"This conversation I object to. A conversation of this nature is not
admissible in any court; it is not admissible in any jurisdiction in the
United States, and I do not see why it should be admissible here. Any
conversation with a member of the crew, in the absence of the accused is not
admissible by any rules of evidence. I therefore object. This member of the
crew, I might add, might say in the absence of the accused that the accused
committed murder, and it would be just as much his right to testify to that
as it would be to testify to what he is now trying to testify to. This
conversation with a member of the crew is not admissible either for or
against the accused. And, as I have already stated, I have no objection to
the Paymaster saying that he, in consequence of any conversation that he may
have had, he did that, that, or the other, but the conversation, and I
believe you gentlemen will bear me out in it, is not admissible on any
ground."
The judge-advocate withdrew the question.
27.Q. On or about September 10th, did you have occasion to go to the
ship's store for any purpose whatever, and if so, as a consequence of a
conversation with a member of the crew, did you or did you not find that any
irregularities had been going on in the story; if so, state briefly what they
were?
Counsel for the accused objected to this question.
The court over-ruled the objection.
Counsel for the accused took exceptions, and stated that any rights
that he might have by the over-ruling of this objection would be saved.
Witness continues testimony:
"I ascertained that the accused had been selling almond bars at
the rate of five cents each, or three for a dime; I then reported
the matter to the commanding officer, and he ordered a board to
investigate the irregularities in the ship's store.
28.Q. Do you know if the members of the crew on the U.S.S. PADUCAH had
any means of knowing the correct selling prices of articles in the ship's
store; if so what were they?
A. To the best of my knowledge the price list was kept posted on
the door of the ship's store. Only on one occasion did I notice
the price was not posted, and the accused explained that it had
blown down. He was instructed to replace it. I saw the price
list there on several occasions afterwards.
Cross-examined by counsel for the accused.
29.Q. Does the accused come directly under your supervision for any
great length of time, that is, as officer or otherwise; have you had any
occasion to meet him, or come in contact with him?
A. From about January 1, 1915, to the present time.
30.Q. And other than finding out the discoveries which you have
testified to, so far as you could observe, his character has been good?
A. Excellent.
31.Q. And the information you received so far as irregularities were
concerned was from conversation that you had with either a member, or
members, of the crew, in the absence of the accused, was it not, Paymaster?
A. No sir, I received my information through a Board of
Investigation. I was present during the investigation.
32.Q. And that information was what they told you?
A. What they told the Board.
33.Q. What they told the Board?
A. Yes sir.
34.Q. That is the only way you got your information?
A. Yes sir.
... Neither the court, the judge-advocate, nor counsel for the accused had
any further questions to ask this witness.
The witness verified his testimony, was duly warned and withdrew.
A witness for the prosecution entered and was duly sworn.
Examined by the judge-advocate.
1.Q. What is your name, rate and present station?
A. F.H. Sturner, Quartermaster, third class, serving on board
the U.S.S. PADUCAH, Navy Yard, Portsmouth, N.H.
2.Q. As whom do you recognize the accused?
A. I recognize the accused as E.F. Snyder, yeoman, first-class,
formerly on board the PADUCAH.
3.Q. What were the duties of the accused on board the U.S.S. PADUCAH?
A. Canteen Yeoman, sir, and G.S.K. Yeoman.
4.Q. Did you at any time between January 20, 1915, and September 8,
1915, purchase any articles in the ship's store; if so, in what quantities,
and at what prices for each article?
A. Yes sir. I bought Bull Durham, not less than fifty at five
cents a pack; Life Buoy soap, not less than ten, five cents per
bar; P.G. Soap, not less than ten, five cents per bar; chocolate
almond bars, not less than fifty, three for a dime; Epicure
tobacco, not less than five, ten cents per can; Prince Albert
tobacco, not less than five, ten cents per can; candy, half pound
boxes, not less than fifteen, fifteen cents per box. That is
about all.
5.Q. Were these articles, articles that were regularly carried in the
ship's store?
A. Yes sir.
Cross-examined by counsel for the accused.
6.Q. Mr. Sturner, you saw the prices posted up there in the ship's
store, did you not?
A. No sir.
7.Q. Were they posted up?
A. Not that I know of; I never saw them.
8.Q. You never saw the prices?
A. No sir.
9.Q. So you had no knowledge as to the prices otherwise than that
which you gained from Mr. Snyder?
A. Yes sir; I found out the prices from Mr. Snyder.
10.Q. Most of your purchases were on credit weren't they?
A. No sir.
11.Q. You had considerable credit there didn't you?
A. Yes sir, I had credit then.
12.Q. There was a time that Mr. Snyder told you that you could not have
any further credit, was there not?
A. Not as I remember.
13.Q. Didn't he tell you that your credit was exhausted?
A. No sir, I cannot remember any time.
14.Q. Did he say that he told you that your credit was exhausted?
A. Yes sir.
15.Q. You now say that he did tell you that?
A. Yes sir.
16.Q. But your credit stopped, didn't it, for some reason?
A. Well, he was taken out of the canteen; he was taken sick.
17.Q. And you never had a quarrel with him about it?
A. No sir.
18.Q. And you didn't think you were paying, when buying these various
articles, anything beyond the regular prices charged by the Navy Regulations?
A. No sir.
19.Q. And you never made any complaint that you were being charged more
than you ought to be?
A. No sir.
20.Q. There is a tin container for this P.G. soap, is there not?
A. I am not sure; I don't know, sir.
21.Q. You paid forty cents for a container?
A. No sir, I never bought a container.
22.Q. You never paid over four cents a bar?
A. Yes sir, a nickel a bar for it.
23.Q. Did you ever seek to inquire whether you were paying too much or
not?
A. Yes sir.
24.Q. When did you first inquire if you were paying more than you ought
to pay for it, between January and September, 1915?
A. I don't remember, sir.
25.Q. From whom did you inquire as to whether you were paying too much?
A. Snyder.
25.Q. What did Mr. Snyder tell you when he replied to your inquiry?
A. Four cents a bar for P.G. soap.
26.Q. After he told you four, you didn't pay him five?
A. Yes sir.
27.Q. How was it you paid him five when he told you it was only four?
A. I laid down a nickel and did not wait for change.
28.Q. You knew the price was four cents?
A. Yes sir.
Reexamined by the judge advocate.
29.Q. By whose authority were you extended credit in the ship's store?
A. By Snyder.
30.Q. You were then not extended credit by authority of the Paymaster?
A. No sir.
31.Q. Did you know that it was illegal to extend credit in the ship's
store?
A. No sir.
Neither the court, the judge advocate, nor counsel for the accused had
any further questions to ask this witness.
...
A witness for the prosecution entered and was duly sworn.
Examined by the judge advocate.
1.Q. What is your name, rate and present situation?
A. Thomas P. Fields, Seaman, on board the U.S.S. PADUCAH, Navy
Yard, Portsmouth, N.H.
2.Q. As whom do you recognize the accused?
A. E.F. Snyder, formerly attached to the U.S.S. PADUCAH.
3.Q. Did you at any time, between January, 1915 and September, 1915,
make any purchases in the ship's store; if so, what articles did you
purchase, in what quantities, as nearly as you can remember, and what price
did you pay for each article?
A. A fountain pen, $3.75; 5 bars Life Buoy soap, five cents a
bar; Hershey's chocolates, about three for ten is what they
sold it for, five bars; two plugs chewing tobacco, forty cents
a plug; that is about all.
4.Q. From whom did you purchase these articles?
A. E.F. Snyder.
Cross-examined by counsel for the accused.
5.Q. You don't mean to state to this court that you paid $3.75 for a
fountain pen?
A. Yes sir.
6.Q. Quite sure of that?
A. Yes sir.
7.Q. Did you buy that on credit?
A. No sir.
8.Q. Paid for it in cash?
A. I bought the first pen on credit, for $2.50 and some one
took that out of my ditty box, and then I bought this one and I
can't quite remember whether I bought the second one on credit or
paid cash for it.
9.Q. You cannot remember whether you paid for it or not?
A. I don't remember. But I think I paid cash for it.
10.Q. Are you sure of that?
A. Quite sure.
11.Q. Didn't you think it was rather high at the time you purchased it?
A. I didn't know.
12.Q. What kind of a pen was it?
A. I forgot the name of it,--Barlite, or something like that.
13.Q. Was it a self-filling pen?
A. Yes sir.
14.Q. Have you got it now?
A. It is over in town in my room.
15.Q. Do you own it now?
A. Yes sir.
16.Q. In other words, did anybody steal that from you?
A. No sir.
17.Q. Was that the fountain pen you bought from Snyder?
A. Yes sir.
18.Q. What did you pay for the first one?
A. $2.50.
19.Q. When did you buy it?
A. In May or April.
20.Q. In what year?
A. 1915.
21.Q. You think it was in May or April?
A. Either May or April. I have two slips in my ditty box now,
receipts.
22.Q. And you paid $2.50 for that one?
A. $2.50 for the first one.
23.Q. Pretty good pen?
A. Yes sir.
24.Q. You are sure somebody stole it from you?
A. Yes sir.
25.Q. When did that pen disappear?
A. It was about a month afterwards.
26.Q. After you purchased it?
A. Yes sir.
27.Q. Some time in either May or June?
A. Yes sir.
28.Q. Then after it disappeared, you bought this one, for which you
paid $3.75?
A. Yes sir.
29.Q. Did you have any conversation with Snyder when you bought this
one, for which you paid $3.75?
A. He spoke to me. I was going to get the same kind of pen.
30.Q. What did you say to him?
A. I didn't say anything then.
31.Q. What did he say to you?
A. He said he had a pen which sold for $4.50, but that he would
sell it to me for $3.75, because it had a chip in the cap,--
a chip was broken out of the cap.
32.Q. Because it had a chip broken out?
A. Yes sir.
33.Q. Did you say anything further to him?
A. No sir; only said I would buy it.
34.Q. You said you would buy it?
A. Yes sir.
35.Q. You don't know whether you got it on credit?
A. I don't quite remember.
36.Q. Did you owe anything to Mr. Snyder at that time; have you paid up
all that you owed?
A. Yes sir.
37.Q. Who did you pay?
A. Snyder.
38.Q. Did you say anything to Mr. Snyder about $3.75 being a high price
to pay for a fountain pen?
A. No Sir.
39.Q. You had it, say, since last June?
A. Well, the second fountain pen I had, it was either June or
July, I have a receipt.
40.Q. And you do not remember the name of it now?
A. No sir, it was a self filling pen.
41.Q. But you don't remember the name of the fountain pen?
A. No sir; Barlite, or something like that.
42.Q. That is as near as you can remember it?
A. That is as near as I can remember it.
43.Q. Did you see the list of prices of these articles posted up there
at all?
A. No sir.
44.Q. Did you ever have any conversation with Snyder as to whether or
not he charged too much for any articles that you bought?
A. No sir.
45.Q. You simply bought the articles and paid him what he told you the
price was?
A. Yes sir.
46.Q. When did you first learn that you had paid too much for any of
these articles?
A. When Snyder was accused.
47.Q. Who told you that you paid too much?
A. I saw the slip posted in the canteen there.
48.Q. That was the first time you saw it posted?
A. Yes sir.
49.Q. Who called it to your attention?
A. Nobody called my attention to it. I simply noticed it up
there, and I looked it over.
50.Q. Did you volunteer to the Court of Inquiry the information that
you gave in this court; who asked you first how much you paid for these
articles?
A. They first passed the word, and the men asked me if I had
bought fountain pens.
51.Q. Who asked you about the price of it?
A. Mr. Rogers.
52.Q. Did he ask you about the price you paid for various other
articles you mentioned?
A. No sir, the fountain pen was all.
53.Q. Is this the first time that you told what you paid for soap to
anybody?
A. Yes sir.
54.Q. Mr. Rogers asked you what you paid for the fountain pen; did he
then ask you the name of the pen?
A. The paymaster is the one that asked me.
55.Q. Did he ask you what kind of pen?
A. No sir. I showed it to him and the told me the name of it.
56.Q. Since then you have forgotten?
A. Yes sir.
Neither the court, the judge advocate, nor counsel for the accused had
any further questions to ask this witness.
...
The court at 12:20 p.m., adjourned to meet tomorrow at 10:00 o'clock
a.m.
Second Day.
Navy Yard, Portsmouth, N.H.
Tuesday, November 23, 1915
The court met at 10:30 a.m.
...
Thomas P. Fields, seaman, U.S. Navy, who had previously testified, was
called before the court, informed that the oath previously taken was still
binding, and stated that he had had read over to him the testimony given by
him on Monday, the first day of the trial and pronounced it correct.
Before this witness withdrew, counsel for the accused desired to
further cross-examine him.
Cross-examined by counsel for accused.
57.Q. What did you state yesterday you paid for that fountain pen?
A. Which one, the first one?
58.Q. The one you have now.
A. Well, for the first one I paid $2.50 and the second one
$3.75.
59.Q. $3.75 for the second one.
A. Yes sir.
Reexamined by the judge-advocate.
60.Q. Did you at any time after having purchased the articles to which
you have testified, learn that you had been over-charged for the same?
A. Why, after Snyder was accused, sir; after I had seen the
list.
61.Q. Did the accused at any time refund to you these over-charges?
A. No sir.
Recross-examined by counsel for accused.
62.Q. You don't know now that you had been over-charged, do you?
A. Yes sir.
63.Q. By seeing the list?
A. Yes sir.
64.Q. Was it by seeing the list that you formed your opinion that you
were overcharged?
A. Yes sir.
65.Q. When did you last see the list?
A. I don't remember, sir, when I last seen it. I don't know
when it was.
66.Q. Did you see it posted?
A. Yes sir.
67.Q. Where?
A. It is posted in the canteen, sir.
68.Q. When?
A. After Snyder was accused.
69.Q. Did you ever see it posted before Snyder was accused?
A. No sir.
70.Q. When was the last time you saw it?
A. Why, I seen it this morning.
71.Q. Who showed it to you?
A. Nobody showed it to me.
72.Q. Where did you see it?
A. On the canteen, sir.
73.Q. How did you happen to see it?
A. I walked by there; I was going to the scuttle butt to get a
drink; when we go to get a drink we pass the bulletin board on
the canteen, there, and as I passed it I glanced at it.
I generally glanced at it when I passed.
74.Q. Do you generally glance at the price list?
A. Couldn't hardly help it, sir. Yes sir.
75.Q. You didn't help yourself by glancing at it before Snyder was
accused, did you?
A. There was no price list there to glance at, sir.
76.Q. How did you happen to glance at it this morning?
A. I just happened to glance at the bulletin board and took a
glance at it.
77.Q. Well, was it for the purpose of verifying your memory of
yesterday that you glanced at the bulletin board this morning?
A. No sir.
78.Q. How did you happen to glance at it?
The judge-advocate objected to this question on the ground that the
witness has already testified, or explained, how he happened to see it, by a
casual glance in passing the canteen, and it would seem that the manner of
bringing out testimony by counsel for the accused savors of a desire to
confuse the witness or to brow-beat him.
The objection was over-ruled by the court and the witness instructed to
answer the question.
A. Well, as I said before, you could not help seeing it on the
bulletin board as you passed by. As you go to get a drink you
pass the canteen, and it is the custom to look on the bulletin
board to see if there is any new orders posted. Most any person
will glance at it, at the price list because it is right next to
the bulletin board.
79.Q. That is how you happened to glance at it this morning, isn't it,
Mr. Fields?
A. Yes sir, exactly.
80.Q. Now when you bought this fountain pen for which you paid $3.75,
why didn't you follow out your custom and glance at the price list first?
A. There was no price list there.
81.Q. When you bought the other fountain pen was there a price list
there?
A. No sir.
82.Q. When you purchased this fountain pen from Mr. Snyder, did you ask
him why there wasn't a price list posted?
A. No sir.
83.Q. What did you purchase this morning?
A. From the canteen, sir?
84.Q. Yes.
A. Nothing.
85.Q. How did you happen to go in there?
A. I didn't say I went into the canteen, sir.
86.Q. Didn't you go in?
A. I only passed there; I walked by.
87.Q. As you went by, you glanced at the price list?
A. I went by the bulletin board as I went to get a drink of
water and that is how I happened to glance at it.
88.Q. Now, Mr. Fields, I want to ask you this question, from January up
to the time that you heard Mr. Snyder accused, have you ever seen in the
canteen or in the ship's store-room a price-list posted?
A. I had never seen one posted on the canteen, or store-room.
89.Q. So that you had never seen a price list?
A. No sir.
90.Q. So that at any time when you wanted to purchase something from
the ship's store you had to take the word of the man who was presiding over
the store-room, or canteen, as the case may be?
A. Yes sir.
91.Q. During the progress of this trial, has the price list been called
to your attention?
A. No sir.
92.Q. So that you don't know at the present time what the prices are
for, say, fountain pens, soap, tooth paste, etc.?
A. Yes sir, I know now sir.
93.Q. You didn't know there was a printed price-list?
A. I know the list that is on the canteen now, sir.
94.Q. When was that placed there, do you know?
A. After Snyder was accused.
95.Q. Do you know who placed it there?
A. I do not, sir.
96.Q. Is it there now?
A. Yes sir.
97.Q. The price list, so far as you understand it, Mr. Fields, should
be posted on the bulletin board, should it not?
A. I think it is supposed to be posted on the canteen, as far
as I know.
98.Q. On the canteen bulletin board?
A. On the canteen bulletin board.
99.Q. It should be posted on the canteen?
A. Yes sir, it is posted.
100.Q. And during the interval between January and September, 1915, you
never saw it?
A. I never seen it.
Neither the court, the judge advocate, nor counsel for accused had any
further questions to ask this witness.
...
There being no objection by the court, or counsel for the accused,
Assistant Paymaster E.H. Barber, U.S. Navy, was recalled as a witness for the
prosecution, and, having been informed by the court that his oath previously
taken was still binding, testified as follows:
Re-examined by the judge-advocate.
35.Q. You previously testified to the selling prices of certain
articles in the ship's store; will you explain how and by what authority
these selling prices were established?
A. An Act of Congress, approved June 24, 1910, authorized a
profit of articles sold in the ship's store not to exceed fifteen
percent, and based on the original cost price, it was endeavored
to make a profit not to exceed fifteen per cent, generally about
ten percent.
36.Q. Who fixed the selling prices of articles for sale?
A. The supply officer.
37.Q. You also stated the authorized selling prices for certain
articles that were carried in the ship's store in your testimony; will you
state from memory, if possible, the authorized selling prices of the
following articles? Bull Durham tobacco?
A. Four cents a sack.
38.Q. Cashmere soap?
A. Seventeen cents a cake.
39.Q. Electro Silicon?
A. Seven cents a can.
40.Q. Bicycle playing cards?
A. Seventeen cents a deck.
41.Q. Colgate's Tooth Paste?
A. Fifteen cents a tube.
42.Q. Was it necessary for you, prior to entering the court this
morning to refresh your memory in regard to these selling prices?
A. It was in the case of electro silicon and bicycle playing
cards.
43.Q. Did you refresh your memory from entries in the same ledger that
you used in the court yesterday?
A. Yes sir, I did.
44.Q. Have the entries in this ledger, so far as your testimony is
concerned, been altered or changed in any manner whatsoever?
A. They have not.
45.Q. Are they, each and every one, in the hand-writing of the accused?
A. All articles except school books received in the ship's store
since the accused was transferred.
46.Q. How often are the accounts of a ship's store yeoman settled or
checked? How often were the accounts of the accused, while serving as store
yeoman on the U.S.S. PADUCAH checked or settled?
A. At the end of each quarter, each fiscal quarter.
47.Q. Were they settled at any other time?
A. They were not, except at the period when he was transferred.
48.Q. Did his balance cash on hand at any of these periods show an
excess of cash?
A. It did not.
49.Q. Did the accused ever turn over to you cash in excess of that
accruing from the sales at established selling prices of articles in the
ship's store?
A. Not to my knowledge. There was no way of ascertaining this
except at the final inventory at the end of each quarter.
50.Q. At the final inventory at the end of each quarter?
A. At the end of each quarter.
51.Q. At the time the accused was relieved, did he turn over to you
cash in excess of that which was due from the sale of articles, or minor
shortages that may have occurred during the quarter, or at the time he was
relieved?
A. He did not.
52.Q. What kind of money was accepted in exchange for articles in the
ship's store?
A. Money which is the common medium of exchange in the United
States. No foreign money was accepted.
53.Q. That then was the only authorized medium accepted in exchange for
the purchase of articles from the store?
A. It was
54.Q. What disposition is made of funds accruing from the sale of
articles in the ship's store?
A. They are received under "General Account of Advances", and
credited by the Auditor for the Navy Department to appropriation
"Provisions, Navy", with the exception that the net profit
accruing from the sale is carried under a separate fund accounted
for by the Bureau of Supplies and Accounts, known as "Ship's
Store Profit."
...
Recross-examined by counsel for the accused.
55.Q. Mr. Paymaster, you always found the accused a pretty efficient
sort of fellow, or chap, or employee, at the time immediately prior to the
time he was accused, while he was under you, did you not?
A. Yes sir. I considered him the most efficient ship store
yeoman that I ever had under my supervision.
56.Q. When the accounts were made out at the end of each quarter, if
any deficiency in the accounts was discovered, the accused always made it up?
A. Yes sir, he made up any deficiency without protest.
Examined by the Court.
57.Q. In answer to a question by the judge advocate, you mention supply
officer; explain who performs the duties of supply officer on the U.S.S.
PADUCAH?
A. Well, I performed that duty until I was detached on November
20th, 1915.
58.Q. What other duties did you perform?
A. The duties originally known as Commissary Officer, General
Storekeeper and Pay Officer.
Neither the court, the judge-advocate nor counsel for the accused had
any further questions to ask this witness.
...
A witness for the prosecution entered and was duly sworn.
Examined by the judge advocate.
1.Q. What is your name, rate and present situation?
A. O.P. Smart, Commissary Steward, U.S.S. PADUCAH.
2.Q. As whom do you recognize the accused?
A. Snyder, Yeoman, first class, U.S. Navy, U.S.S. PADUCAH.
3.Q. Did you at any time, between January 20, 1915, and September 8,
1915, purchase any articles in the ship's store, if so, in what quantities,
and what prices did you pay for them?
A. I have purchased tobacco and soap on numerous occasions,
and always paid six for a quarter, and a rebate was always
offered me, a cent or two cents, which I turned back to the
yeoman. I purchased a fountain pen at $2.50, jack-knife safety.
4.Q. What make is this pen?
A. Parker.
5.Q. From whom did you make these purchases?
A. From Snyder.
...
A witness for the prosecution entered and was duly sworn.
Examined by the judge advocate.
1.Q. What is your name, rate and present situation?
A. William T. Hardy, yeoman third class, U.S. Navy, attached to
and serving on board the U.S.S. PADUCAH, Navy Yard, Portsmouth,
New Hampshire.
2.Q. As whom do you recognize the accused?
A. E. F. Snyder, formerly attached to the U.S.S. PADUCAH.
3.Q. What duty did the accused perform on board the U.S.S. PADUCAH?
A. As canteen and small stores yeoman.
4.Q. Between January 20th, 1915, and September 8th, 1915, did you
purchase any articles in the ship's stores?
A. Yes, sir.
5.Q. What articles did you purchase, in what quantities and what
prices did you pay for them?
A. I got tooth paste, not less than two, at 15 cents apiece.
6.Q. What kind.
A. Colgate's. Soap, six for a quarter, not less than six.
7.Q. What kind of soap.
A. Life Buoy. Almond bars, not less than ten at three for ten
cents.
8.Q. What were these almond bars made of?
A. Of chocolate and nut inside. That is about all I purchased.
9.Q. From whom did you purchase these articles?
A. From Snyder.
10.Q. Do you know if the prices you paid for these articles were
correct, or not?
A. Not at the time of purchase.
11.Q. When did you learn that you had paid incorrect prices for these
articles to which you testified?
A. I learned that after I had taken the canteen as Snyder's
replacement.
12.Q. What are your duties on board the U.S.S. PADUCAH?
A. Canteen and small stores yeoman.
13.Q. Are you in charge of the ship's store?
A. Yes.
14.Q. When did you take this duty?
A. I cannot give the exact date but it was some time between the
1st and 10th of September, I am not positive as to the exact
date.
15.Q. Did you find a price list posted in the canteen when you took
over the duty?
A. Yes, sir.
16.Q. Where was it?
A. The price list I found was way up in the top, one dated
quite a ways back, partly torn and soiled, which I destroyed
and threw out when I was cleaning out the store.
17.Q. Why did you destroy and throw out this price list?
A. Because it was of an old date and could not be recognized
and was of no use. If I remember right it was 1913 or 1914;
it was not a current date.
18.Q. Did you ever see any price list of articles for sale in the
ship's store posted any place on the ship?
A. No, sir, none at all.
...
A witness for the prosecution entered and was duly sworn.
Examined by the judge advocate.
1.Q. What is your name, rate and present situation?
A. Otho Harpe, yeoman first class, U.S. Navy, attached to and
serving on the U.S.S. PADUCAH.
2.Q. As whom do you recognize the accused?
A. E. F. Snyder.
3.Q. What is his rating?
A. Yeoman, first class.
4.Q. Do you know where he has been serving?
A. On board the PADUCAH.
5.Q. What are your duties on board the PADUCAH?
A. Pay yeoman.
6.Q. Where do members of a ship's crew purchase articles which
constitute the daily necessities?
A. In the ship's store and in the clothing and small stores.
7.Q. Have they any means of knowing the authorized selling prices of
these articles?
A. Yes, sir.
8.Q. Will you explain fully?
A. On clothing and small stores there is a memorandum issued by
the Bureau on the first of January, taking effect then, and they
can learn the price of any article by simply inquiring. On the
ship's stores there is a price list prepared under the direction
of the Pay Officer, giving the selling prices of all items that
are carried in the ship's store.
9.Q. And where are these price lists kept?
A. Generally posted inside, or just outside, of the canteen.
In the clothing and small stores it is usually posted inside,
just a written price list for the information of the clothing
and small stores yeoman.
10.Q. In the ship's store or canteen on board the U.S.S. PADUCAH do you
know if this price list that you have mentioned was kept posted at any place?
A. I could not say as to the time, but it was posted in there at
various times; I could not say it was always in the canteen.
11.Q. As nearly as you can remember, state when and how often you saw
this price list?
A. I could not say positively because I never paid any
particular attention to it and in fact I was not around the
canteen very often. I know I have seen it there on two occasions
at least during the present year but I could not say just when.
12.Q. Could you state approximately the month, or months?
A. No further than during the spring, I could not even state
the month.
13.Q. You say you saw this two times?
A. I know I saw it twice because it occurred to me that it
was rather soiled and it would be a good idea to have a new one.
Those are the only specific occasions I remember noticing it.
...
The prosecution rested.
The defense began.
The court took a recess for five minutes.
The court reassembled at the expiration of the recess. Present: All
the members, the judge-advocate, the stenographer, the accused and his
counsel.
The judge-advocate was called to the stand as a witness to produce the
current enlistment record of the accused, and after being duly sworn, was
examined as follows:
Examined by the judge-advocate. [sic]
1.Q. What is your name, rank and present situation?
A. Arthur J. White, Second Lieutenant, U.S. Marine Corps,
attached to and serving at the Marine Barracks, Navy Yard,
Portsmouth, New Hampshire.
2.Q. Are you the judge-advocate of the General Court Martial now in
session?
A. I am.
3.Q. As whom do you recognize the accused?
A. As E.F. Snyder, yeoman first class, formerly attached to the
U.S.S. PADUCAH.
4.Q. Are you the legal custodian of the current enlistment record of
the accused? If so, produce it.
A. I am.
The witness produced the current enlistment record of the accused, it
was submitted to the accused and the court and, there being no objection, was
offered in evidence and so received.
5.Q. Have you read the record over?
A. I have.
6.Q. From that record what is his standing?
A. In what regard?
7.Q. As a matter of conduct and efficiency?
A. From the enlistment record of the accused I find that during
the period he has served in the United States Navy from
September 19, 1911, to November 5, 1915, his markings are as
follows: Sobriety and obedience are all 5, with the exception
of one mark of 4.5 while serving on board the U.S.S. FRANKLIN
from December 28, 1911, to December 30, 1912. On December 31,
1912, he was assigned duty in the pay department of the U.S.S.
MONTANA and continued on this duty until detached November 5,
1913. He served as canteen yeoman on board the U.S.S. CHESTER
from Dec. 31, 1913, to June 30, 1914. On September 30, 1914,
he was in the pay office of the CHESTER. On September 9, 1915,
on the U.S.S. PADUCAH he has a mark of 0 which is since the
Court of Inquiry which examined into his accounts. His
markings in proficiency are, 4; 3.5; 4.; 4.5; 4.5; 4.; 4.;
4.;4.5; 4.5; 4.8; 4.; and 0 which corresponds to the other
marking since charges were preferred against the accused.
8.Q. He would be given the mark of 0 under any circumstances while
under these charges?
A. Yes. While serving on board the CHESTER at Vera Cruz on
April 22, 1914, the accused volunteered to search small boats
lying inshore, for snipers. There is an entry in his record
dated 9-8-15, "Gross irregularities in handling canteen stores
and giving unauthorized credit to enlisted men. Punishment not
awarded on account of man being on sick list and transferred to
hospital."
9.Q. And that last item you read states practically what these charges
are that we are at present trying?
A. So I understand it.
10.Q. Is the highest mark in efficiency 5?
A. It is.
11.Q. And during the entire time of his enlistment, otherwise than the
0 recorded against him on account of these pending charges,
there is no mark less for efficiency or otherwise than 3.5?
A. None less than 3.5 and that only in one case, which mark is
under the heading "Proficiency in Rating."
12.Q. Would you consider the marking and the rating as contained in
that book an excellent one?
A. I would.
13.Q. Would you consider it beyond the average?
A. I would consider it beyond the average?
14.Q. Would you consider it considerably beyond the average?
A. I would.
15.Q. Would you consider that a man who volunteered to go into small
boats during the trouble down in Mexico was a most desirable
seaman in the United States Navy?
A. That would depend largely on circumstances. However, I
should say that he was a desirable man.
16.Q. From reading Mr. Snyder's record, would you consider Mr. Snyder,
being that volunteer, a most desirable member of the
United States Navy?
A. I would.
The judge-advocate did not desire to cross-examine this witness.
Examined by the court.
17.Q. Will you state the age of the accused as given?
A. Date of birth April 4, 1893.
Neither the accused (counsel), the judge advocate, nor the court
desired to further question this witness.
The witness verified his testimony and resumed his seat as judge-
advocate.
The defense rested.
The accused did not desire to make a statement to the court.
The counsel for accused submitted an oral argument to the court, in
substance as follows:
"Mr. President and gentlemen of the court, I am somewhat, of course, as
you gentlemen will readily understand, at a disadvantage in coming before a
court of this sort; in one way I might add that I consider it a disadvantage
and in another way a considerable advantage, somewhat of an advantage on
account of the experience, and considerably I am at a disadvantage on account
of the fact that the procedure is a little different from that to which I
have been accustomed and concerning which I have been trained. I feel,
however, that I am coming before a court that, to say the least, is mighty
human. I really believe in my own mind that I do not exaggerate matters when
I state that in my opinion I am before a court which cannot in any way be
fooled by any technicalities, even if I had a desire in my mind to get the
accused off by such methods. The fact is the evidence is fully in your minds
upon which these charges are based. Anything that I might say perhaps would
not influence you except insofar as you might be influenced by the fact that
the evidence is not sufficient to prove that the accused here is guilty of
the offense with which he is charged. Now, I am not going to in any way
undertake to sum up the testimony of the various witnesses. You, gentlemen,
know it, it is fresh in your minds and you are just as capable of forming an
opinion as to whether that testimony should have any weight as I am, and
perhaps much more so, but I would like to make this only as a suggestion,
that there is not a particle of evidence offered against this accused that
has the slightest weight in proving the charges of which he is accused. In
the first place, my brother has not shown that he has over-charged for any
article because my brother has now been able to show that the accused knew
what the regular prices were. There has been no testimony introduced here,
with the exception of the Assistant Paymaster's, that there has been any
charge which was beyond the regular prices that the accused should have
charged. The Assistant Paymaster, if I remember it correctly, stated that
the price of soap, I think, was four cents. The testimony of some of the
witnesses here is that they paid four cents for the soap. There has been
testimony by some of the witnesses to show that they paid more for Pebeco
tooth paste, I think, and Colgate's shaving soap than really ought to have
been charged them, and I think that another witness testified that he tossed
down a nickel for one of the articles and did not wait for his change.
"Now, upon that testimony, it would seem to me that even if you believe
it, and I am not questioning the veracity of the witnesses for the
prosecution--even if you believe it, it should leave a reasonable doubt in
your minds as to whether or not this boy is guilty of the offenses charged.
I assume that if any doubt exists in your minds which you gentlemen consider
is reasonable, this boy will be given the benefit of the doubt. I might
state in passing that I never realized the seriousness of offenses against
the United States Government until I got into this case. I do not believe
the boy can possibly realize what a serious position he is in, whether
innocent or guilty. You, gentlemen, know that which I did not know and
possibly what this boy did not know either, and I have only this to add to
what I have already stated in rather a hesitating manner, that it would seem
in view of his record and in view of the testimony as it has been given that
there must be a reasonable doubt as to this boy's guilt and I simply ask, if
that doubt exists, that you will give him the benefit of it."
The judge-advocate submitted the case to the court without remark.
The court took a recess until 2:00 p.m., the same date.
The court reassembled at the expiration of the recess. Present: All
the members, the judge-advocate, the stenographer and the accused.
The accused stated that he waived the right for his counsel to be
present.
The record of the proceedings of yesterday was read and approved.
The trial was finished.
The judge-advocate stated that he had no evidence of previous
conviction.
The court was cleared.
The judge-advocate was recalled and directed to record the following
findings:
The specification of the first charge "Proved in part--proved except
the words 'Pebecco tooth paste," 'Cashmere soap,' 'Bicycle,' 'fountain-pen
ink,' 'Epicure tobacco' which words are not proved; and the words 'one
hundred' which words are not proved and for which the court substitutes the
word 'seven' which word is proved."
And that the accused Edward F. Snyder, Yeoman first class, U.S. Navy,
is, of the first charge, "Guilty."
The specification of the second charge "Proved in part--proved except
the words 'Pebecco tooth paste," 'Cashmere soap,' 'Bicycle,' 'fountain-pen
ink,' 'Epicure tobacco' which words are not proved; and the words 'one
hundred' which words are not proved and for which the court substitutes the
word 'seven' which word is proved."
And that the accused Edward F. Snyder, Yeoman first class, U.S. Navy,
is, of the second charge, "Guilty."
The court was cleared.
The judge-advocate was recalled and recorded the sentence of the court
as follows:
The court therefore sentences him, Edward F. Snyder, Yeoman, first
class, U.S. Navy, to be reduced to the rating of Landsman, U.S. Navy; and
then to be confined in such place as the convening authority may designate
for a period of one (1) year; then to be dishonorably discharged from the
United States Navy; to perform hard labor during said confinement and after
his accrued pay shall have discharged his indebtedness to the United States
at the date of approval of this sentence, to forfeit all pay that may become
due him except the sum of three dollars ($3.00) per month during said
confinement for necessary prison expenses, and a further sum of twenty five
dollars ($25.00) to be paid him when discharged from the service pursuant to
this sentence.
The court, having no more cases before it, adjourned to await the
action of the revising authority.
*****************************************************************************
26251-11261
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
OFFICE OF THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL,
WASHINGTON
December 3, 1915.
Submitted, with the recommendation that the proceedings, findings, and
sentence, of the general court-martial in the foregoing case of Edward F.
Snyder, yeoman first class, U.S. Navy, be approved.
The accused in this case was convicted of "Fraud in violation of
Article Eight of the Articles for the Government of the Navy," the
specification thereunder alleging that while attached to and serving on board
the PADUCAH and performing the duties of ship's store yeoman of said vessel
the accused by virtue of such assignment, custody, and sale of stores of the
ship's store, knowingly and fraudulently and with intent to defraud other
persons in the Navy, charged certain members of the crew of the PADUCAH
amounts in excess of the prices lawfully authorized by the pay officer of the
said ship for certain articles from the ship's store, and "Embezzlement, in
violation of Article Fourteen of the Articles for the government of the
Navy," the specification thereunder alleging that the accused having sold
knowingly and fraudulently, and with intent to defraud certain other persons
in the Navy certain articles carried in the ship's store of the PADUCAH at
prices in excess of the lawfully authorized prices, did knowingly and
fraudulently misappropriate and apply to his own use and benefit certain sums
of money derived from the charges in excess of authorized prices for the
same.
The prosecution established conclusively that the accused had over-
charged certain members of the crew for thirteen of the eighteen articles
upon which the excess charges were alleged to have been made, the remaining
articles having been properly excepted by the court in its findings under the
specifications.
The defense made no offer to refute the charges and offered in evidence
the past good record of the accused.
It is noted throughout the record that the court frequently allowed
oral arguments upon the admissibility of evidence to be recorded in violation
of Article R 828, U.S. Navy Regulations, 1913. However, the counsel for the
accused urged that his objections and the reasons therefore be recorded in
order that they might be brought to the attention of the reviewing authority.
The court in view of such a request from counsel for the accused, should have
invited his attention to the foregoing article and required that he furnish
the court with briefs of such arguments in order that the same might be
appended to the record.
It is further recommended that the Naval Prison at the Navy Yard,
Portsmouth, N.H., be designated as the place for the execution of so much of
the sentence as relates to confinement.
Respectfully referred to the Bureau of Navigation for comment.
/s Ridley McLean
Judge Advocate General
*****************************************************************************
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY
Washington, December 7, 1915
The foregoing recommendations of the Judge Advocate General are
approved.
/s Josephus Daniels
Secretary of the Navy
*****************************************************************************
Editor's Comment: So Sands/Snyder was convicted of having overcharged
sailors a total of $7.00, and pocketing the overcharge. For this, he was
sentenced to a year at hard labor and given a dishonorable discharge.
*****************************************************************************
*****************************************************************************
Wallace Smith: February 22, 1922
The following is another of Wallace Smith's sensationalizing dispatches on
the Taylor case.
February 22, 1922
Wallace Smith
CHICAGO AMERICAN
The last woman William Desmond Taylor held in his arms and kissed before
he died -- the actress suspected of having murdered him in an outflaming of
mad jealousy -- was secretly questioned today by detectives, who found her
hidden and under the protection of hired guards in a Los Angeles suburb.
Nervous and shaken at the hint that she would be arrested and charged
with murder, she cried out her denial of the killing and her denial of any but
a "sisterly" affection for the eccentric genius of the films. It was a scene
as dramatic as any she ever acted before the camera -- but not quite as
convincing.
At least not to the detectives. Because they had in their hands a sheaf
of letters which had been newly found, which showed this woman on the most
intimate terms with Taylor. And they had, too, the love scenes between her
and Taylor narrated by Henry Peavey, houseman of the slain movie director.
Frustrated at last by an apparent "collapse" of their subject, with a
busy physician on hand to report her condition serious, they swore that they
would return to the grilling with fresh fuel.
"If she didn't kill Taylor," declared one of the detectives, "she knows
who did. And she'll talk yet. We made the mistake of not putting her under
arrest the day of the murder. She's the one real clue we've had since they
found Taylor's body; if she wasn't so prominent and so well protected by the
influence she has over powerful men, she would have been behind the bars
before now."
It was to this actress, it was rumored, that Taylor made the present of
the $12,000 Oriental jade as a "peace offering" after a quarrel. It is known
that she made him gifts as costly. The jade is said to have disappeared.
She admitted being in his house the day Taylor was killed, and even that
he had put his arm around her.
"But it was just the sort of thing that a brother might do," she said.
"We were very dear friends -- that is all."
"Did you go to his house late at night," she was asked, "and remain there
until morning?"
"That is a lie," exclaimed the woman.
"Was there another man in the room beside Taylor," was the next question.
"A man who was in love with you?"
"That isn't true," she replied. "We were alone."
"Did you have a gun that night?"
It was at this point, according to the report, that the subject
collapsed.
More and more as the little tangled ends of the stories are straightened
out the affair of Taylor and the woman suspected becomes clear. Detectives
working on the case believe that she and the woman who is known to have
visited Taylor in the early hours of the morning are the same.
With her, it appears, "Bill" Taylor was not the austere but paternal
friend. With her he was the impassioned lover, playing the sort of part he
had directed often from the small end of the megaphone out "on the lot."
To her he carried the finished product of many rehearsals -- of many such
affairs.
It is known that they quarreled. She is said to have admitted that, too.
But the same report states she insisted that it was just a trivial dispute and
soon settled.
Officers under orders of Undersheriff Eugene Biscailuz have been
instructed to keep the actress under surveillance.
"She is the one logical suspect," declared Biscailuz today. "She has not
told all the story. And we are not going to rest until she does. Half a
dozen times she has been on the point of arrest. The next time may not fail."
Undersheriff Biscailuz also announced that he would have his men examine
the man who drives the actress' automobile. Through him, the undersheriff
believes, he may be able to get some information about the woman's nocturnal
visits and her relations with Taylor. [The actress referred to in the
preceding material was clearly Mabel Normand.--ed.]
The theory that the man helped a woman with the crime seemed to be
strengthened with a new statement from Christine Jewett, employed in the
household of Douglas MacLean, screen actor and neighbor of Taylor in Alvarado
St. It was his wife who claimed to have seen a mysterious man leaving the
Taylor home fifteen minutes after hearing what seemed to be the discharge of a
revolver.
"It was around 7 o'clock that night that I heard somebody in back of
Taylor's house," said Miss Jewett. "I know the time because it was then that
Mr. MacLean honked his automobile horn outside to tell me to start serving
dinner.
"I went to the screen porch. I saw the man then. When I came he stood
still. A little later I heard him scuffling around. I was busy with dinner,
but each time I returned to the porch I saw him standing there. He must have
been there fifteen minutes, anyway. It was about a quarter of 8 that I heard
the shot."
Henry Peavey, the houseman, was taken to the district attorney's office
and questioned again by District Attorney Woolwine, First Deputy District
Attorney Doran and six detectives. This was after Peavey had revealed the
love scenes between Taylor and the actress and had told stories to prove
Taylor's infatuation for the woman.
It also followed rather a harrowing experience for Peavey, who finds
himself constantly being distracted from his favorite occupation of making
crochet pillow tops.
Volunteer investigators, believed by Prosecutor Woolwine to be employees
of a Los Angeles newspaper, thought that Peavey might speak more freely if he
was taken to the graveyard where Taylor's body lies in a vault and confronted
with a ghost.
According to a statement issued by Prosecutor Woolwine, "a pair of
conscienceless blackmailers," representing themselves as officers of the law,
invaded Peavey's room and took him prisoner. Thereafter, the prosecutor
states, they held him prisoner until midnight before the cemetery experiment.
Peavey was escorted through the midnight dark through the long array of
tombstones to the Taylor vault. Here in solemn tones he was told to speak the
truth.
"I swear to the Lawd, boss," said Peavey, "I told you everything I know."
At that moment there emerged from the gloom a wavering, tall figure, in a
flowing robe. Phosphorent hands gesticulated menacingly in the dark and a
pair of phosphorent eyes leered at the prisoner.
"Whoo--oo--o--." moaned the figure. "I'm Taylor. Henry. Tell these men
the truth."
It was too much, even for Peavey. He enjoyed the first laugh he has
enjoyed since he found Taylor's body.
"You wouldn't fool me, big white body [sic], would you?" he chortled.
And the shame-faced ghost wavered back into the night from which it had
emerged. One thing a ghost can't stand, apparently, is laughter.
The district attorney was quite indignant about the "third degree"
methods attempted on Peavey.
"It is regrettable," he said, in an official signed statement, "that the
district attorney has no jurisdiction over the offense committed by these
miscreants for the false imprisonment of this witness. I have not been able
as yet to ascertain their names, but if I knew them and had such jurisdiction,
they would be in jail today.
"This presumptuous, dangerous and dastardly interference with the orderly
course of procedure by the duly constituted authorities, is calculated to so
terrorize good and well meaning people that they keep secret important facts
that might lead to the discovery of the perpetrators of foul crimes."
District Attorney Woolwine announced himself absolutely baffled at the
mysterious ramifications of the murder and declared that he was going into the
hills for a day in the saddle.
Police working on the strange case were given copies of a letter received
from one who signed himself, "J. Smith" and who mailed the epistle from San
Francisco two weeks after the slaying. The writer declared that he had gone
to Taylor to demand payment for "a consignment of stuff," that Taylor had
attempted to put him off because of lack of funds, and that, as he drew a gun,
Taylor grabbed the weapon and caused its discharge.
The writer added that, as he made his escape he ran into a woman in
Taylor's hallway. Also that has his letter was being mailed he was on his way
to board a ship which was carrying him to foreign ports.
The police chief declared that the letter might be a hoax, but he also
declared that he would not chance overlooking a clue.
Another suspect sought was a man known as "Morphine Mose," reputed to
have been addicted to the drug which gave him his nickname. According to one
report in the hands of the police, "Morphine Mose" was a dope peddler who did
considerable "business" around the studios.
The police were informed that Taylor himself had thrown this man out of
the premises and that the man had sworn vengeance for the affront as well as
for the interference with his business.
The detectives also were interested in the whereabouts of one named
"Anderson," said to be a friend of Peavey's who once secured employment
through Taylor's houseman.
Anderson, it was said, had spent several hours in the Taylor home at the
invitation of Peavey. Later he lost the job Peavey is said to have secured
for him. One theory was that the mysterious Anderson, familiar with the house
and the fact that Taylor kept considerable jewelry and money about, had been
trapped as he was robbing the place and had "shot his way out."
*****************************************************************************
*****************************************************************************
Wanted for Future Issues of TAYLOROLOGY:
Interviews with Mary Miles Minter, published between 1924-1936, discussing the
Taylor case or her relationship with Taylor.
Other interviews with Charlotte Shelby, discussing the Taylor case.
Any interviews with Charlotte Whitney or Chauncey Eaton, discussing the Taylor
case.
Other published contemporary reviews of Taylor's films.
Listing of other fan magazine issues where short story versions of Taylor's
films may be found (PICTURE-PLAY, etc.).
Details of the c. Sept.-Nov., 1918 court-martial at Camp Fort Edward, Windsor,
Nova Scotia, at which Taylor testified.
Any unpublished deposition transcripts taken by the authorities concerning the
Taylor case.
Any unpublished letters written by Taylor.
Any other interviews with Taylor.
Other recaps of the Taylor case, particularly those written between 1923-1935.
Any information indicating what became of Taylor's daughter: Ethel Daisy
Tanner. Did she have any descendants?
Any other material which might throw some light on the Taylor case, or on
those closely associated with it.
(By "other", we mean aside from items previously published or referenced in
TAYLOROLOGY.)
*****************************************************************************
For more information about Taylor, see
WILLIAM DESMOND TAYLOR: A DOSSIER (Scarecrow Press, 1991)
Back issues of Taylorology are available via Gopher or FTP at
etext.archive.umich.edu
in the directory pub/Zines/Taylorology
*****************************************************************************
