"Then," said Mr. McBride, "the agent signed the bills of lading for
fraudulent purposes, and therefore his signature was unauthorized by the
company who employed him, and under the Canadian law he is a forger,
while the other conspirators would be guilty of uttering and publishing
forged paper. The penalty would be just as severe for the latter
offense, under the Canadian law, as it would be for forgery."
I neglected to state that after I had located No. 2, at London, Ontario,
the railroad company's attorneys were informed by the judge who presided
over the criminal court at Dallas, Texas, that in his opinion the
fraudulent bills of lading heretofore described were not forgeries, as
they had been signed by the company's agent, and for this reason, I
presume, Gov. Brown instructed me as he did, he knowing that the
fugitive, No. 2, could not be extradited from Canada unless we could
substantiate a charge for forgery against him. No doubt, at the time,
Gov. Brown believed the ruling of the Texas judge was correct. All of
which I fully explained to Mr. McBride, to which he replied, "A Texas
judge has no jurisdiction in Canada, and his opinion or construction of
our law would amount to nothing here. And if you find any fugitive from
the United States in Canada, who has been connected with the swindle,
you will have to identify them as being the right parties, and then set
forth the manner in which the swindle was enacted and the amount of
money or property secured by the swindlers, and it does not make any
difference what name the Texas statutes or the Texas judge gives the
crime committed in the manner you have described to me, it would be
forgery here. You must understand that you must comply with the
requirements of the Canadian laws in order to extradite a fugitive from
Canada. If you should find your fugitive here in London you can, if you
desire, go to any other county or city in the province of Ontario and
make your complaint, have a warrant issued for the arrest of the
fugitive, bring an officer from that county or city to serve the
warrant, arrest him here and take him immediately before the magistrate
who issued the warrant, and have the prisoner committed to jail for two
weeks without bail. At the expiration of the two weeks, should you
desire an additional two weeks, you can secure same by convincing the
magistrate that you were unable to secure the presence of the necessary
witnesses to substantiate the identity of the prisoner, and his
connection with the swindle; our law will allow you these continuances.
After the prisoner had had his preliminary hearing, if the testimony
offered should be sufficient to satisfy the magistrate, he would then
fix the bond at the amount of four times the amount involved in the
swindle, which would be in this case nearly one-half million dollars."
After McBride had finished the foregoing advice to me, I thanked him and
paid him his fee, which was only $10.00, and went to Chatham, Ontario.
Chatham is the county seat, about fifty miles west of London, and just
half way between London and Detroit, Michigan.
I found the queen's counsel at Chatham, to whom I fully explained my
case. Whereupon, he verified and approved the advice I had received from
Mr. McBride of London. I at once filed the necessary complaint, and
procured a warrant for the arrest of No. 2. The warrant was addressed
and given to the chief of police of Chatham, who accompanied me back to
London, where I pointed out the fugitive to him.
We arrested him immediately and took him to Chatham, where he was locked
up as a fugitive, and his hearing set for two weeks later in accordance
with the Canadian law.
The reader will remember that when I first located No. 2 in London he
was surrounded by newly found friends there, a number of whom were
fugitives like himself. For this reason I felt it prudent to begin legal
proceedings against him in a country where both he and I were strangers
and avoid the annoyance and trouble which his sympathizing fugitive
friends were sure to cause.
As soon as No. 2 was safely lodged in jail I wired Gov. Brown at St.
Louis, Missouri, stating that I had arrested and locked up No. 2 on the
charge of being a fugitive from the state of Texas, United States of
America, that the hearing was set for two weeks later and that while
passing through St. Louis on my way to Texas, I would stop over long
enough to report in person to him. In about two hours I received his
reply, which was a severe reprimand, and read as follows: "Why did you
disobey my instructions when you knew that I had instructed you as to
what the Texas judge had decided, and therefore, the fugitive could not
be extradited from Canada under the existing treaty, nor in accordance
with the act of Congress, which provides for said treaty. Answer."
(Signed) John C. Brown.
To which I answered as follows:
"Hon. John C. Brown, General Solicitor, Missouri Pacific Railroad Co.,
St. Louis, Missouri:--I disregarded your instructions, finding them
erroneous, and that you did not understand the law pertaining to this
case. Have also learned that a Texas Judge's ruling are not considered
in Canada, as I find that I can legally extradite the fugitive from
Canada under the present law." (Signed) Thomas Furlong.
After sending the above message, I borrowed a copy of the revised
statutes of Canada from the Crown Counsel, who would be called
prosecuting attorney in the United States. He marked each section of the
statutes which pertained to our case. I at once put the law book in my
grip, and started for St. Louis, arriving there the following morning.
I immediately reported to Vice-President Hoxie, whom I found in his
office. After the usual greeting Mr. Hoxie said to me, "Tom, Gov. Brown
showed me a message that he had received from you yesterday. He appeared
to be quite angry."
To which I replied, "I am here to explain my actions fully, and I wish
you would kindly request Gov. Brown to come to your office at his
convenience, as I think my explanation should be made to him in your
presence so that one explanation may serve both. My time is limited, as
I must go to Texas and procure certain witnesses and return with them to
Chatham, Ontario, within two weeks, the time set for the hearing."
Whereupon, Mr. Hoxie sent for Gov. Brown, who appeared in a few moments.
After the usual salutation, I repeated the instructions I received from
him. I then stated that I had found it impossible for me to have carried
out the instructions in Canada without subjecting myself to prosecution,
and probably a sentence to the penitentiary, and I, therefore, concluded
to do the next best thing, which was to employ a competent attorney, who
advised me as to my rights and how to proceed legally under the laws of
that country. I then produced the copy of the statutes, which I had
borrowed from the crown counsel, and directed Gov. Brown's attention to
the marked sections before mentioned, which he carefully read. After he
had finished I produced and read the telegram I had received from him,
at the same time calling his attention to the question he had asked me
to answer in his message.
He then compared his message with the one he had received from me in
dignified silence, and then without a word handed the two messages to
Mr. Hoxie, near whose chair he was standing. Mr. Hoxie read them and
then looked up at the Governor and said, "Governor, what do you think of
this matter?"
For answer Gov. Brown deliberately walked around the table to where I
was sitting and extended his hand to me, and I arose and took it. He
turned to Mr. Hoxie and said in a pleasant manner, "Furlong was right
all the way through." Then turning to me he said, "Furlong, you ought to
have been a lawyer. I was a little angry when I received your message
yesterday, but I see that it was all right, as you only answered the
questions I had asked you."
I left St. Louis for Dallas that night, and while there I arranged with
the Chief of Police, Jim Arnold, and other well-known citizens, to
accompany me to Chatham, Ontario, as witnesses in the case pending
against No. 2. These witnesses had all known No. 2 for years, and were
familiar with his reputation as to truth and veracity, his business
connections, etc. The witnesses and myself arrived in Chatham in time
for the hearing of No. 2.
The judge, after hearing the evidence, committed No. 2 to jail without
bail to await extradition papers from the President of the United States
and the Governor General of Canada. No. 2 was defended in the hearing by
two noted barristers, who at once appealed to a higher court. In due
time the appeal was argued and the action of the lower court sustained;
whereupon No. 2's counsel had the case taken up to the Privy Court at
Toronto. This court affirmed the action of the lower courts, and it
being the highest tribunal in Canada its decision was final and No. 2
was committed without bail for extradition.
I immediately left Toronto for Washington, D. C., having already
received the necessary papers from the state of Texas. I presented these
to the Department of Justice in Washington, on the evening of my arrival
there, and they were promptly approved and sent to President Cleveland
for his signature. By the way, these papers were the first of their kind
ever signed by President Cleveland, it being but four days after his
inauguration for his first term as President of the United States. The
papers were delivered to me and I left for Chatham, Ontario, for the
purpose of taking No. 2 back to Dallas, Texas, for trial and bearing the
commission of President Cleveland to do so.
The following day the train on which I was riding stopped twenty
minutes at Canandaigua, New York, for dinner. As I was eating my dinner
a messenger boy called out my name at the dining room door. I answered
and he handed me a telegram, which was from the high sheriff of Chatham,
and read as follows:
"When my jailor went to the cell occupied by No. 2 at twelve o'clock to
day he found him dead. Had apparently been dead an hour. Cause of death
yet unknown. Probably heart failure."
I wired him that I would be in Chatham on the following morning. On my
arrival there a post-mortem autopsy was made of the body of No. 2, and
it developed that he had committed suicide by taking laudanum. The
sheriff and the jailor have never been able to satisfy themselves as to
how No. 2 got possession of the poison. He had friends and relatives who
lived at Jackson, Michigan, who called at Chatham and identified the
body, and took it to Jackson for burial.
I then returned to Dallas, Texas, so as to be present at the trial of
No. 1 and No. 4, they being the only two of the swindlers left for
trial.
When I had first arrested the swindlers and placed them in jail at
Dallas, the Prosecuting Attorney called me to his office and told me
that the defendants had employed a number of the most able attorneys at
that bar to defend them, and he said that he thought that the railroad
company ought to permit him to select an attorney to assist him in the
prosecution of the defendants. I told him that I had no doubt but that
General Solicitor Brown would do so if he would make the request of him.
He replied that as I was going direct to St. Louis that he wished me to
make the request for him, which I did. When I delivered his request to
Gov. Brown, he replied that Capt. Tom Brown, of Sherman, Texas, was the
railroad company's attorney in that district, an able lawyer, and he
would be glad to instruct him to assist the Prosecuting Attorney in
every way that he could, or, he would furnish him any other of the
company's attorneys in Texas, should he believe their assistance
necessary, and that he would take it up with the Prosecuting Attorney at
Dallas and make all the necessary arrangements.
I communicated these facts to the Prosecuting Attorney. Later Gov. Brown
informed me that he (the prosecuting attorney) had selected a lawyer to
assist him who was not in any way connected with the railroad service,
and that he had suggested that this assistant should be paid a fee of
five or six thousand dollars by the railroad company for his services.
Gov. Brown further stated that the attorney selected for an assistant
was not looked upon with favor by either himself or any of his
assistants. Some of the assistants connected with the legal department
of the railroad company, under General Solicitor Brown, refused to
associate themselves with the cases if the man selected by the
Prosecuting Attorney was connected in any way with them. His services
were refused and Capt. Tom Brown went to Dallas for the purpose of
assisting in the prosecution of the two remaining accused swindlers.
I had turned the duplicate bills of lading over to Capt. Brown and on
the morning of the trial of No. 1 and No. 4, he placed these papers in
his overcoat pocket with other documentary evidence. He was a little
late and hastened into the dining room, leaving his coat and hat on a
rack in the corridor of the hotel. When he finished his breakfast and
returned to his overcoat he discovered the papers had been stolen. When
the cases were called into court, the prosecuting attorney asked that a
nolle prosequi be entered in the cases, thus letting two of the
principals in the swindle go free.
Thus ended the cotton swindle, the most gigantic swindle of this kind
that had ever taken place in the United States, or, I believe, in any
other country up to that time.
Capt. Tom Brown was afterwards elected as Judge of the Supreme Bench of
Texas, and was always esteemed as an able jurist and a thorough
gentleman.