V, *'** *.' 
 
 " *v . ;-. -* 
 *V
 
 #3 
 
 PUBLISHED and COPYRIGHTED 
 by 
 
 JARED FLAGG 
 
 NEW YORK, 1920 
 
 Eighth Edition Part 1 ) This issue to consist of 
 Second Edition Part 2 j One hundred thousand copies
 
 TO THE READER 
 
 Part 1 . of this book originally appeared 
 under the title of "Flagg's Flats." It was 
 written in 1907 not published. No publisher 
 would accept the manuscript fearing he might 
 become implicated legally. A few typewritten 
 copies were read by my friends all of whom 
 advised me not to have it published on the 
 ground that it might cost me my life. But at 
 that time I was recklessly indifferent. Nothing 
 cuts deeper than undeserved slander and I had 
 been cut to the quick. 
 
 Finally a printer was found who said: 
 "Give my lawyer time to examine the Court 
 records and if he tells me that the statements 
 contained in your manuscript are true I will 
 print the book if it costs me my liberty." Mr. 
 Charles Francis said this and in 1 908 the first 
 edition came out. Seven editions followed 
 each larger than the preceding one. 
 
 In 1917, Part II was added and a new title 
 substituted. 
 
 Anything worth reading at all is worth 
 reading carefully. If you read this book take 
 your time. In writing it I have made no at- 
 tempt to palliate my faults and make my side 
 appear better or the other side worse than the 
 facts justify. It is a simple narrative a true 
 story relating to certain events (many illegal, 
 a few legal) given in the order in which they 
 occured without embellishments a copy of 
 the Court files not so much what I say as 
 what the records say.
 
 The facts prior to these publications have 
 appeared only in the Court records. Few read 
 the records; few, therefore, are familiar with 
 the facts in my case. 
 
 JARED FLAGG. 
 
 P. S. There is no such thing as criminal 
 slander. One person can say anything about 
 another and the other persons only redress is 
 by civil procedure; but let him put it down in 
 black on white and it then, if false, becomes 
 criminal libel. The difference between talking 
 and writing, slander and libel, is jail. If the 
 author "goes up" the printer is liable to go 
 with him. 
 
 Over ten years have passed since the first 
 edition (Part 1 ) was published. Over ten 
 years ago I sent marked copies to all the news- 
 paper editors and the public officials therein 
 denounced. I accused them respectively of 
 being liars, scoundrels, thieves, blackmailers, 
 perjurers and forgers; then folded my arms, so 
 to speak and waited to see what they were 
 going to do about it. They didn't do anything 
 didn't even let out a peep. And from that 
 day to this I have not heard one word from 
 any one of them. I have however, heard many 
 expressions of righteous indignation from 
 others, and have received no end of com- 
 mendatory letters from friends and from utter 
 strangers. Have also received (and executed) 
 orders from all the largest public libraries and 
 all the greatest educational institutions in the 
 United States. In short, it has fallen to the lot 
 of few men, in any sphere of life, to be 
 felicitated and feated as I have been since I 
 wrote and published this book.
 
 LETTERS FROM UNIVERSITIES 
 
 YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY. 
 
 New Haven, Conn. 
 Mr. Jared Flagg. 
 
 Dear Sir: I take the liberty of asking whether a 
 copy of your "Flagg's Flats" could be deposited in 
 this Library for the use of future students and in- 
 vestigators in genealogy and history. 
 
 Assuring you that the book could be put to no 
 better use, I remain, 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 J. C. Schwab, 
 
 Librarian. 
 
 HARVARD COLLEGE LIBRARY. 
 
 Cambridge, Macs. 
 Jared Flagg, Esq. 
 
 Dear Sir: My attenion has been called to the 
 publication named below and to the desirability of 
 placing it in this Library for the use of professor* 
 and students of the University. 
 
 The work not being readily procurable through the 
 book-trade, I venture to ask that the Library may be 
 favored by the gift of a copy. Your kindness in this 
 matter will be highly appreciated. 
 
 William C. Lane, 
 
 "Flagg's Flats," by Jared Flagg. Librarian. 
 
 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, IN THE CITY OF 
 
 NEW YORK. LIBRARY. 
 Mr. Jared Flagg.' 
 
 My dear Sir: My attention has been called to 
 
 your book entitled "Flagg's Flats," and if you will 
 
 present a copy to this Library we will be very glad 
 
 to receive one for preservation among our collections. 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 W. D. Johnston, 
 
 Librarian. 
 
 LIBRARY OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY. 
 
 Princeton, N. J. 
 Jared Flagg, Esq. 
 
 Dear Sir: I am advised a book called "Flagg's 
 Flats" is to be desired for this library, and, being 
 privately printed, is to be had only from you. 
 
 It would be much appreciated if you should see fit 
 to promote the usefulness of this library by giving or 
 selling us a copy. 
 
 Believe me, Yours very truly, 
 
 E. C. Richardson.
 
 VASSAR COLLEGE LIBRARY. 
 
 Poughkeepsie, N. Y. 
 Mr. Jared Flagg. 
 
 Dear Sir: We very much desire to have in this 
 library a book entitled "Flagg's Flats," of whicn you 
 are the author, but we have learned that it is not for 
 sale. If we may not buy a copy, may we beg one? 
 There is much interest here in the subject with which 
 it deals. 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 A. Underbill, 
 Ref. Librarian. 
 
 THE JOHN HOPKINS UNIVERSITY 
 
 Baltimore, Md. 
 Mr. Jared Flagg. 
 
 Dear Sir: The library of the John Hopkins Uni- 
 versity would be pleased to receive a copy of "Flagg** 
 Flats." Upon its receipt a suitable acknowledgement 
 will be sent. 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 Dr. M. L. Raney, 
 
 Librarian. 
 
 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY 
 
 Ithaca, N. Y. 
 Mr. Jared Flagg. 
 
 Dear Sir: The Cornell University Library has a 
 considerable number of books on municipal govern- 
 ment of cities and kindred topics, and would be much 
 pleased to add your work, "Flagg's Flats." 
 
 If you are willing to send one to our library it will 
 be regarded as a great favor. 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 
 Andrew C. White, 
 
 Asst. Librarian. 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN. 
 
 Dear Sir: We have five copies of your book, 
 "Flagg's Flats." If you can spare another copy it 
 would be much appreciated by the following: Miss 
 Mary Pratt, Librarian, Mitchell Public Library, Hilli- 
 dale, Mich. Please send C. O. D., direct to Hillsdala. 
 Thanking you for your kind response to our former 
 request I am, 
 
 Very gratefully yours, 
 
 Theo. W. Koch. 
 
 Librarian.
 
 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA, 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 Philadelphia, Pa. 
 Mr. Jared Flagg. 
 
 Dear Sir: I have heard that recently you have had 
 printed a book entitled "Flagg's Flats," which is of 
 great interest and importance in connection with the 
 Municipal Government of New York City, showing 
 the misrule, etc., which has been carried on there. 
 May 1 ask you if it is possible to send a copy of this 
 book to the University of Pennsylvania Library? We 
 would be very grateful to you if you can comply 
 with this request. 
 
 Very truly yours 
 
 {Catherine S. Lieper, 
 
 Assistant Librarian. 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO. 
 
 (Founded by John D. Rockefeller) 
 
 Office of the Librarian. 
 
 Chicago, 111. 
 Mr. Jared Flagg. 
 
 Dear Sir: We have heard of a recent book pub- 
 lished by you, and entitled "Flagg's Flats." If it be 
 not asking too much we should be very glad to get 
 two copies, one for our General Library, and one for 
 our Dept. of Political Economy. If you can oblige 
 us in this way, kindly send them by express, collect. 
 Truly yours, 
 
 Zella Allen Dixson, 
 
 Librarian. 
 
 SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY. 
 
 Syracuse, N. Y. 
 Mr. Jared Flagg. 
 
 New York City. 
 
 Dear Sir: Would it be possible for our library to 
 obtain a copy of your book, "Flagg's Flats"? 
 Yours very trulv, 
 
 ' M. J. Sibley, 
 Acting Librarian. 
 
 THE WELLESLEY COLLEGE, 
 
 My Dear Mr. Flagg: The Wellesly College Library 
 desires a copy of your book, "Flagg's Flats." 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 H. St. B. Brooks, 
 
 Acting Librarian.
 
 8 
 
 THE COLLEGE OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK. 
 Mr. Jared Flagg. 
 
 Dear Sir: If you will send us a copy of your 
 work, "Flagg's Flats," we will gladly defray cost and 
 make the book accessible to readers in our library. 
 Yours truly, 
 
 Henry E. Bliss, 
 
 Deputy Librarian. 
 
 NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW. 
 
 Washington Square, East, New York City. 
 Jared Flagg, Esq. 
 
 Dear Sir: May I request a copy of "Flagg's Flats" 
 for our Law Library, 32 Waverly Place, New York 
 City? We shall appreciate it, I assuie you. 
 Very truly, 
 
 Leslie J. Tompkins, 
 
 Secretary. 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA 
 College of Liberal Arts. 
 
 Los Angeles, Cal. 
 
 My dear Mr. Flagg: We would like very much 
 to have a copy of your book, "Flag_g's Flats,'" in our 
 library. What would be the cost? 
 
 Very truly you rs, 
 
 C. N. Brown, 
 
 Librarian. 
 
 DE PAUW UNIVERSITY 
 
 Green Castle, Indiana. 
 Mr. Jared Flagg. 
 
 Dear Sir: Will you kindly send a copy of your 
 book, "Flagg's Flats," to our library? It would be 
 appreciated here. We have a debate in preparation 
 on the subject of city government, and would find it 
 esp< -ially useful. 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 L. M. Powell, 
 
 Librarian. 
 Ann Harbor, Mich.
 
 CRIMES OF JARED FLAGG 
 
 PART 1 CHAPTER 1 
 
 It is dangerous to have an idea. There 
 is no telling where a man with an idea may 
 land. I once had an idea and it landed me 
 in the Tombs. 
 
 It occurred to me that the majority of 
 people were honest, and if installment fur- 
 niture dealers were willing to trust customers 
 ninety per cent of goods purchased it should 
 be safe to trust them one hundred per cent. 
 If it were policy to deliver one hundred dol- 
 lars' worth of furniture on ten dollars down 
 and take chances on collecting the remaining 
 ninety, it would be feasible to sell one hun- 
 dred dollars' worth or more without the cus- 
 tomary ten per cent deposit. The first large 
 advance payment should be eliminated and the 
 entire bill liquidated by weekly payments. 
 That was my idea and I imparted it to Mr. 
 Jacob Baumann, of J. & S. Baumann, fur- 
 niture dealers. At first Mr. Baumann did not 
 take kindly to it. "It had never been tried 
 would be risky", etc. But when a person 
 has nothing to risk, and everything to gain 
 he can talk impressively, and I explained how 
 the system in vogue worked a hardship on 
 young couples; it was deterring many from 
 marrying; it was not so much the inflated in- 
 stallment prices as the large advance payment.
 
 10 
 
 Therefore, I maintained that the dealer who 
 had the foresight to adopt my idea would 
 reap a reward. 
 
 "If so sanguine it can be worked without 
 loss," said Mr. Baumann, "you advance the 
 first ten per cent and we will then fill orders 
 provided we are satisfied with the references 
 After we have collected an amount equal to 
 that advanced by you we will return it; but 
 if any of your customers skip with the goods, 
 or return them before we have collected the 
 first payment, you will forfeit your ten per 
 cent. Agree to this, and we will pay you 
 a commission on moneys collected." A con- 
 tract was signed, and although I felt ticklish 
 in assuming a risk I had urged another to 
 assume I lost no time in beginning operations. 
 An advertisement appeared inviting those de- 
 siring to furnish homes on the installment plan 
 without any payment down to call at my office. 
 
 A gentlemen called, one about to be mar- 
 ried. He knew of a flat that suited "them" 
 but the landlord wanted rent in advance. The 
 gas trust required a cash deposit. The minis- 
 ter expected his fee, spot cash, and would 
 prefer it in gold. Every one wanted cash 
 down except Mr. Flagg, and this was why he 
 had called. They estimated the flat could be 
 furnished for one hundred and fifty dollars 
 but Mr. Flagg, "an experienced furniture man* 
 would know best." Mr. Flagg knew nothing. 
 It depended on his "intended"; if the young 
 woman had ideas there was no computing what 
 it might cost. "Anything that suits me will 
 suit Elphye," he said; but it proved the re- 
 verse; everything that suited Elphye suited 
 him. Consequently with Elphye's notions of 
 what might "look cute", the bill amounted 
 to three hundred and fifty dollars. Still as
 
 11 
 
 weekly payments were to be moderate a chat- 
 tel mortgage was signed, his references looked 
 up and 1, as per agreement, deposited with 
 the firm ten per cent of his bill thirty-five 
 dollars. 
 
 At this particular time I may have looked 
 like ready cash but I was pinched financially, 
 my capital being three hundred dollars. Yet, 
 why should I, who had so often staked thous- 
 ands hesitate now? Nothing is so imprudent 
 as excessive prudence. So up it went my 
 last dollar on my idea. 
 
 The advertisements drew the "no cash 
 down" proposition proved attractive. My 
 sales the first week amounted to three thous- 
 and dollars, therefore, I made three hundred. 
 The only trouble it was paper profit. I 
 could see no cash, not even a small balance; 
 my capital was gone; it was "up" as security 
 "in the firm's bank" and likely to remain 
 there for some time. 
 
 If one cannot pay with checks he should 
 pay with notes. No man is too poor to draw 
 a note, therefore bright and early the next 
 week I started for the store armed with a 
 pocket full of blank notes and several cus- 
 tomers; one a boarding house keeper, wished 
 to furnish a fourteen room house. My sales 
 that day not week amounted to four thous- 
 and dollars; that was making money that 
 was my idea. 
 
 Money may not buy happiness but it will 
 buy a lovely imitation. That day I lunched 
 with members of the firm who conveyed to 
 my mind the best was none too good for me. 
 They invited me to make myself comfortable 
 in their innermost private office while "poor 
 devils" the fifteen and twenty-dollar-per- 
 week-clerks who never knew what it was to 
 have an idea waited on my customers.
 
 12 
 
 At the close of the day the cashier informed 
 me that a note was not a check. Instead of 
 four hundred dollars, the first payment (ten 
 per cent) to which the firm was entitled, I had 
 tendered a ninety-day note. "This is not in 
 accordance with the agreement," he said: "I 
 am not authorized to accept it the firm will 
 have to be consulted." 
 
 Whereupon I did the consulting, the firm 
 did the authorizing and the cashier accepted 
 the note. The next day without being au- 
 thorized he accepted another and kept accept- 
 ing them. And when I intimated that I lacked 
 the wherewithal to pay for my advertisements 
 I was told to draw a note and present it to 
 the cashier, and when I saw and counted the 
 cash it dawned on me, that after all, my notes 
 might be better than I thought they were. 
 
 In course of time, the three hundred orig- 
 inal capital came back, and as new notes were 
 "floated", old ones were redeemed and real, 
 not paper, profits started to flow in my direc- 
 tion. It had taken time, but when once started 
 they came, faster and faster, larger and larger 
 one, two, three years, and still they came. 
 Not only the Baumann firm, but five other 
 firms were now contributing to my bank ac 
 count. One of these Henry Thousen & 
 Company became financially involved and in 
 lieu of a cash settlement I was constrained to 
 accept commissions in furniture. Not wishing 
 to have this furniture "eat itself up" in stor- 
 age I furnished a flat with a view of renting it 
 at a profit. 
 
 This was the beginning, this accident, I did 
 not realize it but it was the beginning just 
 the same of the so-called "Flagg Flats". Had 
 I known then what I now know that little five 
 foom flat, with its porcelain bath-tub and sta-
 
 13 
 
 tionary ice-box, would never have been fur- 
 nished by me not in a hundred years. Yet 
 there is nothing wrong in subletting a flat at 
 a profit. Every human being has the right 
 of habitation, just as he has the right to eat, 
 but no person has the legal right to rent an- 
 other an abode for immoral purposes. Know- 
 ing this, I was particular in procuring a ten- 
 ant, after which I simply made an arrangement 
 with the janitor to collect the rent and remit 
 proceeds. 
 
 The fourth year passed and people still came 
 to purchase furniture without a payment down. 
 My two line advertisements did the work, my 
 business prospered; there was not a cloud on 
 the horizon; even little imitators were no long- 
 er in evidence. It seemed at last that I was 
 to experience joy the joy the rich take in 
 making their dearest friends and poorest rel- 
 atives green with envy. But this happiness 
 the ambition of so many was not for me. 
 
 The unexpected happened. The original 
 Baumann firm, the members of which had 
 backed me, was at this time transacting a stu- 
 pendous business. My trade, although not to 
 be despised, was a bagatelle compared to 
 theirs, but their largest competitor Ludwig 
 Baumann was not aware of this and attri- 
 buted the activity of J. & S. Baumann to "that 
 man Flagg". "He is doing it he is the one." 
 If we allow him to continue, in time he will 
 gobble up all the trade in town. We do not 
 approve of the no cash down idea; we never 
 heard of selling furniture on such a crazy basis 
 until we heard of Flagg. He has ruined the 
 business, now we will ruin him; we will give 
 him a dose of his own medicine, and they 
 certainly made it interesting for me. 
 
 Ingenuity, integrity, sobriety, efficiency and
 
 14 
 
 energy often count as nothing compared to 
 capital. This rival firm possessed power 
 money and with it could drive me from the 
 field as easily as I had driven others little 
 impecunious competitors who had essayed to 
 interfere with my business. 
 
 The first gun, or rather broadside, was fired 
 February 25, 1 890; and from that day in their 
 particular line of endeavor I cannot say I have 
 been a factor. On that memorable day this 
 rival firm bought a full page in all the lead- 
 ing newspapers, and in flaring type announced 
 they would henceforth sell furniture on the 
 longest credit and without any payment down. 
 
 The other firm, J. & S. Baumann, did not 
 wish to aid in putting me out of business but 
 asked if I could afford to expend in advertis- 
 ing five hundred dollars a day. Self-preser- 
 vation is the first law of nature and in justice 
 to themselves they would have to strike back. 
 There was to be war; thousands were to be 
 squandered in advertising those three little 
 words, "No money down." 
 
 A fifty cent advertisement is no match for 
 a five hundred dollar advertisement. And so it 
 came to pass at the expiration of four years 
 that I, who had revolutionized for the time 
 being, the installment business of the city sud- 
 denly found myself swallowed up as it were, 
 just as big fish swallow little fish. Unfortun- 
 ately, however, I was not a bankrupt. Had I 
 at that crucial moment been stranded without 
 a dollar how different it all might have been; 
 how different my life; how brilliant a future 
 I might have had. My reputation was intact; 
 my relatives had not been humiliated and I 
 had not been "damned" by prison bars. But 
 fate was against me; thousands were still to be 
 placed to my credit. Those three potent 
 words had paid a profit.
 
 15 
 
 How was I to invest this profit? Every firm 
 with which I had been associated was in my 
 debt. The money came to them in driblets. 
 At intervals I received, according to agree- 
 ment, commissions on money collected. The 
 firms would foreclose no mortgages, if buyers 
 made payments however small; therefore bills 
 which should have been liquidated in two 
 years might drag on four or five, and it was 
 to be a long wait. I wanted funds to pay for 
 the necessary luxuries of life and if I waited 
 for the money to come in it might go as fast 
 as it came. But if in lieu of cash commis- 
 sions I would accept furniture every firm with 
 which I was associated would settle on the 
 spot. And by utilizing this furniture in flats 
 I could derive a permanent income. We 
 usually do that which we deem best under 
 existing conditions, and in the light of the ex- 
 cellent showing made by the first flat I had 
 furnished the accident it seemed best to 
 derive a steady income from rather than 
 draw on my principal. This original flat 
 had paid a profit of four dollars per week for 
 fifty-two weeks. In renting it I happened to 
 find tenants in all respects desirable and owing 
 to this misfortune my calculations miscarried. 
 Had I leased it to a tenant capable of paying 
 the first months rent but not the second, and 
 after being put to the expense of dispossessing 
 him had I had the good fortune to have found 
 another capable of creating such a disturbance 
 that the owner of the property would have 
 felt it incumbent to have dispossessed me, I 
 might then have been able to form a better 
 estimate of the ultimate profits of the business; 
 but as it was I unknowingly fooled myself by 
 basing my figures on the actual cash showing 
 of this original flat. I said to myself, ''If one 
 furnished flat will yield a profit of four dollar*
 
 16 
 
 per week, one hundred will yield four hun- 
 dred dollars per week." And not many 
 weeks later I had one hundred flats in opera- 
 tion. The furniture firms then owed me 
 nothing and had I stopped there might have 
 made a success of the business, but like many 
 others I did not become conservative until too 
 late. I did not appreciate that my business 
 was running smoothly, well in hand and every 
 detail looked after; nor did I consider that 
 there might be pitfalls; I thought I knew it all 
 so staked all, jeopardized a small certainty for 
 a large uncertainty. I was ambitious and 
 wanted an income of one hundred thousand 
 dollars a year. If one hundred flats could be 
 made to pay a profit of four hundred dollars 
 per week, five hundred could be made to pay 
 five times four hundred, or two thousand per 
 week one hundred thousand dollars a year, 
 These were my figures; figures usually look bet- 
 ter on paper than in real life. However, correct 
 or incorrect, the fact remained that the furni- 
 ture firms were willing to trust me. With 
 money, money is made. Why not use a little of 
 their money? Why not have five hundred flats? 
 And five years from the day I embarked in 
 the business I did have four hundred and 
 eighty-eight flats equipped to the most minute 
 detail; pictures, linen, silver, china, cooking 
 utensils and all. To facilitate business I ran 
 an upholstering shop, a carpet cleaning estab- 
 lishment, a crockery and tin-pan store, and 
 laundry in which three thousand of my sheets 
 were washed each week. I employed book- 
 keepers, collectors, janitors, night watchmen, 
 scrub women, painters, paper hangers and 
 plumbers, by the year. Also a bed-bug gang 
 the only one of its kind ever organized in 
 the United States. 
 
 About this time every one, it seemed, had
 
 17 
 
 heard of the "Flagg Flats;" and as a result 
 money flowed into my office like water but 
 it also flowed out. Owners of flat property 
 entreated me to buy. They told me to name 
 terms and I named them. And on May 1 , 
 1894, I held title, as shown in the Hall of 
 Records, to over half a million of flat property 
 all of which has since advanced enormously 
 in value. I would ultimately have owned all 
 free and clear had not the police manifested a 
 disposition to go into business with me. 
 
 To this I objected. 
 
 I told Captain J. J. Donohue, of the West 
 Twentieth Street Police Station, and Captain 
 James K. Price, of the West Thirty-seventh 
 Street Police Station, and Captain Martins, of 
 the East Thirty-fifth Street Police Station, that 
 if I were a person who would engage in a dis- 
 reputable business I could see some object in 
 taking them into partnership, but as I was not 
 such a person would share no profits with 
 them. In confirmation of this I here quote 
 from the minutes of my flat trial (which will 
 be described in subsequent chapters) : 
 
 "Captain Donohue wanted one hundred 
 dollars a month and I would not give it to him 
 (this was before I was indicted) and McCon- 
 ville came to me (after I was indicted) and 
 said I was a fool and standing in my own 
 light: that if I would arrange with the Captain 
 substantially I could be protected, and I said, 
 Til give you nothing; I am engaged in a law- 
 ful business, and I will give you or your 
 Captain nothing.' 
 
 This statement I made in Court under oath 
 and it stood uncontradicted to the end as I 
 shall show hereafter by excerpts from the 
 Court Records. I was firm because I believed 
 my position impregnable. From the start I 
 had been animated by a desire to succeed;
 
 18 
 
 not to destroy myself; and, aside from right 
 or wrong, I knew that one disreputable tenant 
 might drive ten reputable ones out. Every 
 superintendent I had, subsequently testified 
 that I had given orders to dispossess, at any 
 cost, questionable characters who might gain 
 admittance. My jury heard this and other 
 evidence and so acquitted me of the charge 
 that I knowingly rented flats to disreputable 
 persons. 
 
 It is not the act, it is the intention. Was it 
 my intention to bring notoriety on my relatives 
 and myself? This is the question; and those 
 effected should have answered it before pass- 
 ing censure. They should have considered my 
 intentions; and my object in having explained 
 at length all the circumstances which influenced 
 me to embark in the flat business is to refute 
 the charge that I deliberately engaged in the 
 business for the purpose of renting my premises 
 to dissolute persons. Even recently, years 
 after having been acquitted of this offence, 
 certain newspapers despite the court records 
 have published that I was adjudged guilty of 
 the infamous charge. And many persons who 
 read newspapers but do not read court 
 records believe me a vicious character. The 
 police, however, not only the blackmailing but 
 also the honest members of the force know 
 the truth. Police Commissioner Parker, Chief 
 of Police Moses W. Cortright, Inspector 
 Schmittberger, Police Captain Chapman, 
 Central Office Detective Mason, and other 
 honest members, have said that it was "handed 
 out" to me. 
 
 It was "handed out" to many according to 
 the following: 
 
 Captain Donohue's salary was $2750. per 
 year. In 1914, several New York daily 
 papers stated that: "forty thousand dollars in
 
 19 
 
 cash was found locked in his private desk in 
 the West 20th St. station house." 
 
 Detective McConville's salary was $1050- 
 per year, but according to the newspapers, his 
 wife, when suing for a separation in 1914, 
 stated he was worth over $200,000, The 
 New York World published, Sept. 24th, 1914, 
 x x McConville was said from time to time 
 to be one of the richest men on the force." 
 
 These two professional blackmailers, Dono- 
 hue and McConville, wanted money, not law, 
 and imagined I would scare at the sight of 
 gold shields and brass buttons and disgorge as 
 others had disgorged; but when they discover- 
 ed they had encountered a man who would 
 abide by his decision they assumed a different 
 attitude; and then not at the beginning I 
 was given to understand in language more 
 potent than polished that I could take the 
 consequences. 
 I took them. 
 
 Two days after this final warning Police 
 Captain Donohue and his "man Friday," 
 Officer McConville, on ex parte evidence 
 which is no evidence secured an indictment 
 against me. 
 
 I quote my lawyer addressing the Court :- 
 "That was the 23d of May, and on the 25th 
 of May these two people alone the law re- 
 quires that the indictments shall contain the 
 endorsement of all the witnesses examined 
 before the Grand Jury and these two did 
 not invoke the aid of anybody but Donohue 
 and McConville alone, two days after the re- 
 fusal of Flagg to submit to their demands, 
 procured this indictment on ex parte evidence." 
 What is a Grand Jury? What is an indict- 
 ment? What is ex parte evidence? Webster's 
 Dictionary defines a Grand Jury as one to de- 
 cide whether an accused person is to be placed
 
 20 
 
 on trial. If he is, then this Jury issues a docu- 
 ment called an indictment. If, before issuing 
 the indictment, the members of said Jury care 
 to hear both sides of the story they can send 
 for the accused person and hear what he has 
 to say on the subject. But they did not send 
 for me; they did not hear what I had to say; 
 they simply indicted me on what is called ex- 
 parte evidence. 
 
 The definition of ex-parte according to 
 Webster's Dictionary is "one part;" that which 
 is brought forward as evidence by one side 
 only. 
 
 And it was on such evidence that I was 
 indicted. 
 
 Captain Donohue did the swearing and his 
 "man" McConville, the corroborating, two 
 days after I had been warned that I could 
 "abide the consequences." Donohue who at 
 the time had never been in one of my flats 
 and was not acquainted with a single one of 
 my tenants, testified before the Grand Jury 
 that he personally knew my tenants were im- 
 moral and knew I knew it. 
 
 What do you think of that for ex-parte 
 evidence? 
 
 And the "man Friday," who at the time did 
 not even know me, what did he do? He 
 kissed the bible and to make himself solid with 
 his master, Donohue, swore he did know me. 
 I quote from the Court records: "On the 25th 
 of May, 1 894, McConville went before the 
 Grand Jury and swore to this indictment 
 against Flagg. McConville then comes before 
 this jury and swears he never saw Flagg until 
 the 3 1 st of May, 1 894. He swears that he 
 was one of the witnesses upon whose testimony 
 this indictment on the 25th of May was found; 
 and he swears before you thereafter in hi 
 direct examination, and again three times in
 
 2! 
 
 his cross-examination, that he never saw Flagg 
 in his life until the 3 1 st of May, 1 894." 
 
 When it comes to perjury there may be 
 those in the "department" who can equal 
 Barney McConville, the ex-truck driver, but 
 they cannot beat him. 
 
 But what does a newspaper reporter or 
 "space-writer" care for justice? All indict- 
 ments look alike to them. So long as it was 
 an indictment it was news. News to a "space- 
 writer" means money and in head-line letters 
 it was announced to the public "Flagg is 
 indicted." How, and by what means, 
 whether by ex-parte evidence, whether by per- 
 jured testimony or honest testimony, they did 
 not state, and did not care. 
 
 I quote from my lawyer's opening address: 
 
 "The constitutional right of every defend- 
 ant of every man charged with crime is 
 that he shall meet his accusers face to face; 
 that he shall have the right to cross-examine 
 and examine the witnesses against him. But 
 on the 25th day of May, 1894, in secret, with- 
 out notice to this defendant, without giving 
 him an opportunity to defend himself, two 
 police officers get access to the Grand Jury. 
 You have preliminary magistrates. The law 
 says that every man who is arrested is entitled 
 to an examination. This is his constitutional 
 right under the statute, and of this right, this 
 defendent, Jared Flagg, was robbed." 
 
 The papers made no mention of this act of 
 thievery. They informed the public an indict- 
 ment had been handed down and this was 
 sufficient to make my business, social and fair 
 weather acquaintances, and many of my 
 relatives, look upon me askance. Had they 
 known the truth they might have regarded the 
 matter differently, but barring Donohue and 
 McConville no one knew the truth. No one at
 
 22 
 
 that time knew the indictment was putrid ex- 
 cept these two. They also knew if they 
 attempted to press it for trial they would be 
 jailed as perjurers. As a matter of fact it 
 never was and never will be tried; it was only 
 a trick to blight my reputation and place me 
 at their mercy. 
 
 It is difficult to comprehend the depravity 
 which exists in the police department. We 
 clothe our officers with power which the cor- 
 rupt ones abuse. We enact laws relating to 
 prostitution of no value to us, but invaluable 
 to them for blackmailing purposes. Is it sur- 
 prising, therefore, that these uniformed thieves 
 became solicitous as to the chastity of my 
 tenants? 
 
 With this indictment for a club they now 
 could demonstrate the terror of my position 
 which they did by having me arrested, not as 
 they ordinarily arrest one charged with a mis- 
 demeanor (as I was) but as a felon or some 
 treacherous desperado. 
 
 A misdemeanor is not a crime. If a person 
 throws paper on the side-walk, if he smokes in 
 a public conveyance or if he raises his voice 
 he commits a misdemeanor; or if he happens 
 to have a tenant who sings too loudly (al- 
 though he may know nothing of it at the time) 
 he, as landlord, can be charged with a mis- 
 demeanor for "maintaining a nuisance" and 
 convicted; the extreme penalty for which is a 
 fine of five hundred dollars and imprisonment 
 for one year in the county jail. This is the 
 "heinous crime" of which I was convicted. 
 
 The endorsement on the indictment upon 
 which I was tried reads, "Guilty on second 
 count for maintaining a nuisance;" and this 
 was the only thing I ever was convicted of, 
 exactly this and nothing more as the records 
 prove. 
 
 And yet, before this conviction Officers
 
 23 
 
 Rohrig and McConville appeared in my office, 
 242 West 23rd Street, and the first thing I 
 knew I was handcuffed to them and being 
 marched through the streets followed by a 
 small army of people. Did they shackle me 
 with irons because they were fearful I might 
 run away, or to add to my abasement in 
 furtherance of their threat that I could "take 
 the consequences" for refusing to pay tribute 
 to Donohue? 
 
 No person who has not been subjected to 
 such an ordeal can realize what it means to be 
 dragged through the streets in this manner. 
 One may read, guess, imagine, but he cannot 
 comprehend all a person suffers. The ignominy, 
 odium and scandal, is enough to fill any self- 
 respecting person with abhorrence. I respect- 
 ed myself but was more determined than ever 
 not to submit to their blackmailing demands. 
 So. in a few days they had me indicted again 
 and again threw me into a cell; and again in- 
 dicted me and again and again. Five in- 
 dictments five counts in each twenty-five 
 "cooked up" complaints, all secured by the 
 same witnesses and on the same bogus charges, 
 with bail bonds running high into the thous- 
 ands. 
 
 Then it was that the newspapers issued 
 "extras," and that people "said things." 
 
 "He must be innately wicked, a dangerous 
 character. And only to think" to repeat 
 the words of Katharina our old nurse, who 
 has lived in the family forty-eight years "he 
 was such a nice boy, so devout. My! My! 
 had I not seen it with my own eyes in the 
 papers, I would not have believed it;" etc. 
 
 And my every day acquaintances, some of 
 whom forgot we were acquainted, also "said 
 things." "We know the papers can distort 
 the truth can make white appear black can
 
 24 
 
 leave out, add to, rip a man up the back and 
 blast his good name in a day we know all 
 this but that is not the question; they are 
 pounding him; can we afford to mix in? Can 
 we afford to be seen in his company? If we 
 meet him we will treat him with superficial 
 politeness but that will be all." And for 
 years thereafter that was all. 
 
 Men strive to retain social position; it is 
 right they should, therefore, I felt a delicacy 
 in intruding my presence upon them and so 
 held aloof; not that I was embittered; I know 
 how inclined we are to jump to conclusions 
 and how frequently we jump in the wrong 
 direction. 
 
 Those who turned their backs were ignorant 
 of the facts; had heard only one side and that, 
 not my side. I wanted my side heard but the 
 police did not. I had pleaded "Not Guilty," 
 which was equivalent to challenging them to 
 confront me in a court of law. 
 
 Eight times I appealed to the District At- 
 torney to be brought to trial that I might vindi- 
 cate my name. 
 
 Those who did not look below the surface 
 regarded me with suspicion. But this did not 
 worry the police, who were inflexible in their 
 determination not to have my case go to trial. 
 If anything will make a blackmailing police- 
 man wince it is a jury. He recoils from a 
 jury trial as the "Devil would from holy 
 water" knowing his methods are not popular 
 with the people. Therefore, they decided to 
 settle their little differences with me out of 
 court and in their own way. 
 
 A meeting to this effect was held in the 
 private office of the St. James Hotel, at the 
 time located on Broadway, corner of Twenty- 
 sixth Street. 
 
 I quote from my lawyer's summing up : R. S.
 
 25 
 
 Davenport a discharged janitor of Mr. Flagg 
 makes affidavit:- 'I met Captains Donohue and 
 Price by appointment at the private office 
 in the St. James Hotel, January 1 5, 1895; and 
 Donohue told me if I would go to his lawyer 
 and make affidavit that the flat houses, 225 
 and 227 West Eighteenth Street were dis- 
 orderly and that Flagg was aware they were 
 being used for such purposes his lawyer would 
 make it to my interest.' 
 
 Davenport was not averse to selling him- 
 self, and after having sold himself to the 
 police offered himself to me. He told me that 
 Captain Price said:- "To keep indictirg and 
 arresting Flagg is equivalent to sticking pin 
 in a rhinoceros; no visible effect." 
 
 According to his opinion that portion of 
 my anatomy designated by them as hide wa 
 too thick, and they finally resolved if ever I 
 were to be brought to terms they must change 
 tactics and they did. They changed them 
 that very day the day of the secret conclave 
 held in the little back room the little private 
 office of the St. James Hotel, January 1 5, 
 1895.
 
 26 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 Pandemonium means Hell, and from that 
 time, January 15, 1895, pandemonium reigned 
 supreme in the so-called "Flagg Flats." 
 
 In this chapter I shall say something about 
 "stool-pigeons," and that those unfamiliar with 
 the term may know the kind of bird a "stool- 
 pigeon" is I shall define him. A "stool- 
 pigeon'' is a "ward-heeler," a thug, a low 
 down person who for a consideration will do 
 any "dirty work" to accommodate the police. 
 
 Immediately after the St. James Hotel 
 meeting the police employed gangs of these 
 thugs to invade my vacant flats and smash 
 dishes, break mirrors and rip up with sharp 
 knives parlor furniture, cane-seated dining 
 chairs, bed spreads, portieres, lace curtains, 
 carpets, rugs, mattresses and pillows. Also 
 to throw tables, chairs, dressers, chiffoniers, 
 pictures and ice boxes down the air shafts. 
 But this was not all, water pipes were cut, 
 flooding the floors and ruining ceilings. Axes 
 were used in demolishing the walls and en- 
 ameled bathtubs. In my Sixteenth and 
 Seventeenth Street buildings, also at 225 and 
 227 West Eighteenth Street, and 1 09 and 111 
 West Thirty-third Street, access to the toilets 
 could be had from the main halls, and eighty 
 of these expensive china bowls were broken 
 with hammers in one night. 
 
 Up-town, down-town, on the East Side and 
 the West Side, locks were broken, doors pried 
 open, and furniture and ornaments which cost
 
 27 
 
 me thousands were stolen or destroyed by 
 these loafers who worked under the direction 
 and protection and in the presence of our uni- 
 formed "guardians of the peace." 
 
 It is difficult for the unsophisticated to 
 realize how such things can happen in a civi- 
 lized country but according to the papers of 
 April 5, 1910, it is still going on. To quote 
 the New York World: "The Mayor (meaning 
 Mayor Wm. J. Gaynor) "then proceeded to 
 1 09 Mulberry Street, and entered the rooms 
 on the second floor where he found all the 
 furniture smashed and even the bottoms of 
 the chairs torn out. The officer told the Mayor 
 that everything had been destroyed during the 
 recent police raid." 
 
 This kind of work coupled with the "third 
 degree" is what the police call demonstrating 
 the majesty of the law. 
 
 Once after several of my flats had been 
 wrecked I was, without a complaint having 
 been made, taken by Detective McConville to 
 the West Twentieth Street station house and 
 escorted one flight up to Captain Donohue's 
 private bedroom. The Captain was waiting 
 and requested me to take a seat. For a few 
 moments he eyed me quizzically, and then 
 said, "Well! how do you like it?" 
 
 My reply although printable will detract 
 nothing from the narrative if omitted. Suffice 
 it to say no compromise was affected and the 
 reign of terror continued. Every building I 
 had, in every part of the city, was infested 
 not only by "stool-pigeons" but by officers in 
 citizens* attire, "fly-cops" they are called, with 
 orders to "bull-doze" old tenants out and 
 prevent new ones from entering. 
 
 Hundreds vacated, the most desirable ten- 
 ants were the first to leave. Naturally this
 
 28 
 
 exodus impaired my income; with large pay- 
 ments to make, and larger ones coming due, 
 I was in dire straits. 
 
 I quote from my lawyer's summing up:- 
 "Flagg's tenants are not only harrassed by 
 'stool-pigeons' but police detectives. McCon- 
 ville, Rohrfg, Cohn, Zimmerman and others 
 have, according to their own testimony, in- 
 fested his premises for months." 
 
 The "stool-pigeons" carried skeleton keys 
 and could open a door in the "twinkling of an 
 eye." They would not only go from one 
 flat to another to plunder and steal, but would 
 occasionally back up a truck, and cart a load 
 of furniture away in a night. 
 
 John Dowd, a night watchman employed 
 by me once caught four "stool-pigeons" in the 
 act of loading a truck and threatened to shoot 
 them if they did not replace the furniture. 
 Two "plain clothes men" (policemen in citi- 
 zens' attire) sneaked up behind, overpowered 
 him, and with the aid of their accomplices 
 the thieves about to make away with my furni- 
 ture clubbed him to a pulp. On the West 
 Twentieth Street Police Station blotter, op- 
 posite his name, are written the words, 
 "Resisted arrest." According to the New 
 York American" of January 17, 1915, these 
 beatings are still being administered and 
 police detectives are still offering the same 
 excuse "resisted arrest." 
 
 When the police murder an innocent man 
 these are the two words that let them "down 
 and out." The law accords them the privi- 
 lege of killing any person who resists arrest, 
 and they assume the privilege of accusing any 
 person of this offense whom they accidentally 
 or purposely kill. 
 
 John Dowd did not die that night, but did 
 die shortly thereafter.
 
 29 
 
 Skeleton keys were also used by the police 
 and their "stool-pigeons" when in the small 
 hours of the night they entered my unoccupied 
 flats with their prostitutes. It was nothing un- 
 usual in those days on arriving at my office 
 to be informed that in such-and-such a build- 
 ing drunken policemen had caroused half the 
 night with women whom they had brought in 
 from the street. 
 
 On one occasion while passing from room 
 to room in showing what I supposed was an 
 unoccupied flat to a prospective tenant, she 
 (the prospective tenant) suddenly "let out" 
 a most unearthly scream and dashed out of 
 the building shouting, "Police! Police! There 
 was no necessity for calling an officer as there 
 was already one in the flat and in bed. 
 
 At another time (also in broad daylight) 
 two policemen and a woman slipped in 
 through the basement door of my building, 
 1 2 3 West Fifty-sixth Street and although they 
 ran into the arms of my janitress they brushed 
 her aside and took possession of a flat. Upon 
 receiving this information I communicated 
 with Police Headquarters and an officer wa 
 detailed to investigate. Together we hurried 
 to the flat and there they were "big as lire," 
 with their helmets off, and "loading up" with 
 whiskey. They were not so heavily loaded 
 as to be incapable of recognizing their brother 
 officer the "investigator" and without 
 ceremony passed him the bottle. With head 
 back, eyes closed, he smacked his lips and 
 said, "Hot stuff!" First there were two, then 
 three, and had I complained again there might 
 have been four. So what was the use? 
 
 Were I to live that part of my life over I 
 would, on the first demand, throw up my hands 
 and without a whimper let them rob me. 
 Under the law it is as much a crime to give as
 
 30 
 
 to accept a bribe; yet had I ignored this law 
 and parted with my money I would not have 
 parted with my good name. When I think of 
 the "mud" thrown at me because I respected 
 the law and think how difficult the "going" has 
 been in this "mud" and how it has bespattered 
 those near to me, I am frank to admit I would 
 hesitate a long time before again sacrificing 
 the esteem of my fellow beings upon the altar 
 of principal. Self-respect is a poor substitute 
 for the respect of others. We may say we 
 care nothing for the opinion of those who 
 condemn without investigating but we do care. 
 This talk of "living down" a bad reputation i 
 often a delusion and a snare. We have too 
 many business and social functions to per- 
 form, and too many troubles of our own to 
 waste time in investigating others. Yet if an- 
 other is being maligned we find time to listen; 
 and as we are more prone to believe evil than 
 good many believe evil of me. Believe but 
 do not know, and when asked why can advance 
 no reason; but they can talk, and this is how 
 they talk:- "Flagg? V/hat Flagg Jared Oh! 
 Excuse me. He never wronged me. No! not 
 me, nor any person with whom I am acquaint- 
 ed; but I have heard and read so much. No, 
 I cannot recall just what, but have seen his 
 name in print and know that he had trouble 
 with the police, etc., etc." 
 
 The police had trouble with me and I had 
 trouble with them some of them. Therefore, 
 the question may arise why I remained in the 
 flat business. Why not sell out and be rid of 
 such men men willing to violate their oath 
 of office for personal gain. But I could not; 
 to sell meant ruination. A person who haa 
 saved a little strives as hard not to lose it a* 
 the person who has accumulated millions. It 
 is his all. My all was invested in flat property,
 
 31 
 
 but so heavily encumbered that to force a sale 
 would result in losing all. This was my posi- 
 tion and the police appreciating my dilemma 
 and to still further hamper me threatened with 
 arrest every owner from whom I leased a flat 
 if he failed to dispossess me. There were 
 about one hundred of these odd flats and 
 every owner with the exception of Mr. Reeder 
 dispossessed rne. 
 
 These were squally times and it seemed only 
 a question of time before my own bed would 
 be placed on the sidewalk. Yet, in justice to 
 my fellow beings, I must confess there never 
 was a time not even when things looked 
 darkest not even when it seemed as if the 
 whole world were going to turn against me 
 there never was a time that someone a 
 woman a man someone did not come 
 forward did not take rne by the hand and 
 display traits so noble that I could not and 
 did not for one moment lose confidence in 
 mankind. 
 
 Mr. Reeder took me by the hand and said: 
 "I shall not dispossess you." 
 
 Gilbert Totten Reeder stands high: and to 
 Captain Pickett, of the West Thirtieth Street 
 police stafion he said, "Go ahead and arrest!" 
 But Pickett failed to make good his bluff. 
 Other captains however bulldozed my other 
 landlords. They also warned every janitor, 
 clerk and mechanic under penalty of being 
 sent to the "Island" to quit my employ. They 
 quit all quit with the exception of two, 
 James Irby and William Young. They were 
 determined to stand by until the "last gun was 
 fired." It was "fired." James was put in a 
 cell in the West Twentieth Street station house 
 and clubbed almost to death, and William 
 vanished that same night. We have our ideas 
 as to what happened to him but no evidence.
 
 32 
 
 Almost ten years have passed and I am told 
 by his wife that she has not seen or heard 
 from him. 
 
 Every person in any manner connected with 
 my buildings was arrested or threatened with 
 arrest, and as for myself, I had been arrested 
 so many times I was beginning to get accustom- 
 ed to it. Once in writing to my father I ex- 
 pressed the opinion that the worst was over 
 as I had not been arrested for four days. But 
 I was mistaken the worst was to come. 
 
 "Revenge is sweet" they say but I think 
 the spirit of retaliation, this desire to get even 
 not only redounds to the detriment of the 
 malicious person but draws him deeper into 
 the mire. A man who has the power and yet 
 refrains from injuring those who have injured 
 him is a great man, worthy the esteem of all 
 men, but unfortunately we are not all great, 
 'and when the tension of my reason was re- 
 laxed then the low, the brute, the animal in- 
 stinct, itching to get at them was in me. 
 
 They the police would not "come out in 
 the open" and fight, so I proposed to drag 
 them out. 
 
 If a police captain and detective without 
 cause could have me indicted and ruined I felt 
 that with cause I could have them indicted and 
 "broke." While "boiling over" with thi 
 spirit of revenge I communicated with the 
 Grand Jury, and asked permission to appear 
 before that honorable body. 
 
 A prisoner calls his lawyer his "mouthpiece. " 
 At the time I was a prisoner out on bail and 
 wanted to take my lawyer into the Grand Jury 
 room, but they, the jurors, would not stand 
 for it. If I had anything to say I could go in 
 alone, otherwise remain out. 
 
 No person, unless he enjoys hearing himself 
 talk, likes the idea of entertaining twenty-five
 
 35 
 
 jurors for an hour or so, but as it was the only 
 way I could wreak vengeance I "braced up" 
 and went in alone. The foreman requested 
 me to be as brief as possible as it was past the 
 closing hour. This tended to disconcert me. 
 Mine was too long a tale, fraught with too 
 many wrongs to skim over lightly, and I asked 
 if I could appear before them the following 
 morning. "No," I was to say what I had to 
 say then or not at all. 
 
 The jurors were seated at a long table and 
 I was told to take a seat at the far end; but I 
 stood and without "beating about the bush" 
 proceeded to tell my story. Five minutes 
 ten minutes and I kept talking, but they paid 
 little attention; most of them were examining 
 documents and whispering to each other. A 
 few were gazing at the ceiling. One had his 
 watch on the table, and kept looking at it. 
 Everything was cold and formal, and for all 
 the progress I was making I might as well have 
 been soliloquizing. Talking under such cir- 
 cumstances is depressing, yet I had something 
 to say and was saying it. Step by step I was 
 unfolding my list of tribulations. Presently 
 two jurors at the other end of the table ap- 
 peared interested, at least were looking at me, 
 so I directed my statements to them. Then 
 another excused himself for interrupting and 
 requested that I repeat a statement. This oc- 
 currence put me more at ease, and when the 
 foreman asked me to speak louder I accom- 
 modated him. By degrees others became in- 
 terested and I talked to them also. At last 
 the man with the watch put it in his pocket. 
 This was encouraging, and I "warmed up" to 
 my subject. And when he turned in his chair, 
 placed his hand to his ear and leaned forward, 
 I took pains that he not only heard every word 
 I uttered but appreciated its meaning. I told
 
 34 
 
 him and I told them how in five years I had 
 built up a large business; how careful I had 
 been to safeguard it, how watchful, how 
 anxious to hold my tenants; how disastrous it 
 would have been if I had permitted disorderly 
 persons to gain access to my flats. I told how 
 the captains had, despite the good character 
 of my tenants, predetermined to levy blackmail 
 on me, how they with one accord had met 
 and decided to force me to pay to each 
 a stipulated sum, ranging from one hun- 
 dred to three hundred dollars per month ac- 
 cording to the number of buildings owned or 
 leased by me in their respective precincts. I 
 told how they had approached me; how they 
 had each prepared a carefully figured memo- 
 randum giving the rent derived from each flat 
 and the profit to me per week and per month; 
 and how they had told me that in my case 
 they proposed to be liberal, were going to per- 
 mit me to retain half of my money, half of 
 my own profits. In other words, in consider- 
 ation of supplying the capital and doing the 
 work, I could keep for myself half of what I 
 made, provided I, in consideration of not being 
 molested, passed over in bills, not checks, the 
 other half. I told how I had declined to be 
 a party to such underhanded proceedings, and 
 how they had given me two days in which 
 to consider the matter, and how on the third 
 day I had been arrested by Officer McConville 
 and his "side partner". I also told how I 
 had subsequently called on Dr. Parkhurst, how 
 he had appointed Arthur F. Dennett, Superin- 
 tendent of the Society for the Prevention of 
 Crime, to investigate to personally call on all 
 my tenants and that the report was so sat- 
 isfactory that Dr. Parkhurst called at my office, 
 and offered me his support. I told how I 
 had called on Mr. Roosevelt, who at the time
 
 35 
 
 was President of the Police Board of New 
 York City, how he had appointed Detective 
 Sergeant Mason (one of the few members 
 of the force in whom he had confidence) to 
 make an investigation of my flats; and how, 
 after reading Mason's report, he (Roosevelt) 
 also had volunteered to stand back of me and 
 do everything in his power to stop further per- 
 secution. I told of my interview with Re- 
 corder Goff, and how he had advised me to 
 "go over the head" of District Attorney Fel- 
 lows and ask permission to appear before the 
 Grand Jury. I told them all this, and more, 
 and they, listened, listened attentively; there 
 was no longer any whispering, any reading of 
 documents; no longer any looking at the ceil- 
 ing. Every man in that room was looking 
 straight at me, and I could feel they were 
 "with me"; that they knew I was speaking the 
 truth; and after having detained them long 
 past their closing hour, I thanked them for 
 their courtesy and retired. 
 
 This Grand Jury of which Francis H. Leg- 
 gett, the wholesale groceryman, was foreman, 
 indicted Police Captains J. J. Donohue, and 
 James K. Price and Police Detective Henry 
 W. Schill. 
 
 The real way "to get even" is to forget, but, 
 not knowing this then, I thought only of ven- 
 geance. Revenge was what I wanted and I 
 got it furthermore, got all the trimmings that 
 go with it. To say I was "trimmed" does 
 not adequately express what they did to me. 
 
 As previously stated, the worst was to come, 
 and it came immediately after these officers 
 (owing to the indictments) had been suspended 
 from the "department". Up to this time I 
 had had a few captains and a score or two of 
 detectives arrayed against me; but now al- 
 most a battalion, headed by McConville and
 
 36 
 
 Acting Captain Lynch who succeeded Captain 
 Donohue, were lined up against me and with- 
 out a semblance of legal evidence swooped 
 down on my flats like an avalanche, broke open 
 doors and cleaned out every one. 
 
 "Impossible, preposterous, it could not be 
 done it would be illegal the police would 
 not dare to smash doors and raid flats without 
 evidence." 
 
 When I hear expressions of this kind I think 
 of the lawyer who told his client that it would 
 be unlawful to lock him up, that it could not 
 be done. "Yes," said his client, speaking 
 from behind the be? rs "but I am here." And 
 so it was with my tenants they were there 
 behind the bars. 
 
 Hard working young women employed in 
 department stores and living in my tenement 
 flats were carried off by the dozen in patrol 
 wagons for the purpose of enabling the police 
 to illegally make out a seemingly legal case 
 against rne. 
 
 To substantiate this I could publish a port- 
 folio full of affidavits but a copy of one will 
 suffice : 
 
 City and County of the State of New York 
 Louise Fink, being duly sworn, deposes and 
 says that on the 8th day of October, 1894, 
 in the East Thirty-fifth Street Station-house, 
 about 7:30 in the evening, she heard the 
 Captain of Police in charge of such precinct 
 make use of and say the following words, or 
 words to the effect to certain prisoners in 
 the said station-house bearing the names of 
 Addie Smith, Josephine Merrit and Lizzie 
 Gregory, to wit: "There is no occasion to 
 carry on and cry so, girls, for if you set 
 up no defense and plead guilty and swear
 
 
 37 
 
 Flagg knew you were using his flats for 
 immoral purposes, we will let you down 
 light to-morrow morning at Special Ses- 
 sions. It is not you that we want to get 
 the dead wood on but Flagg". 
 
 LOUISE FINK. 
 
 Sworn to before me on this, 1 2th day of 
 October, 1894. 
 
 GEORGE W. MINOR 
 Commissioner of Deeds. 
 
 Maggie Smith and Anna Chapman, em- 
 ployed in Hearn's Fourteenth Street dry goods 
 store, who were also in the station house at 
 the time, swore to the same fact before the 
 same notary. 
 
 The police not only made these unlawful 
 raids but raided flats over which I had ab- 
 solutely no control. 
 
 To dispossess a tenant a landlord is com- 
 pelled to employ a city marshal. The ten- 
 ant is allowed three days in which to vacate 
 or appear in Court to show cause why he 
 should not be evicted. If he sets up any ex- 
 cuse the Judge usually extends the time. It 
 is not the landlord but the Judge who names 
 the day on which the tenant must vacate. Un- 
 til that time the landlord's hands, figuratively 
 speaking are tied; and, if law-abiding, he will 
 obey the law. I am a law-abiding citizen and 
 to exemplify how the police took advantage 
 of this fact it is only necessary to quote from 
 the Court Records: 
 
 District Attorney: "Did Captain Lynch 
 warn you that the building, 225 West 18th 
 Street, was being used for disorderly pur- 
 poses?" 
 
 Flagg: "Yes." 
 
 District Attorney: "Did he on May 29th, 
 1895, notify you in writing to abate the nuis- 
 ance ? ' ' 
 
 Flagg: "Yes. And the next day I noti-
 
 38 
 
 fied him in writing that I had instructed City 
 Marshal James M. Gano to dispossess my ten- 
 ants, although far from satisfied that they were 
 violating any law. 
 
 District Attorney: "When you heard them 
 plead guilty after they were raided were you 
 satisfied?" 
 
 Flagg: "No." 
 
 District Attorney: "No?" 
 
 Flagg: "No." 
 
 District Attorney: "Well, tell us Mr. 
 Flagg, how many of your tenants were raided 
 during June, 1895, and how many pleaded 
 guilty and were fined?" 
 
 Flagg (to judge) : "May I explain under 
 what conditions these raids were made?" 
 
 District Attorney: "I object." 
 
 Judge: "Objection sustained." 
 
 Flagg (to the jury) : "Do you want to 
 get at the truth of this matter?" 
 
 District Attorney: "I move to have that 
 remark striken from the records." 
 
 Judge (to court stenographer) : "Strike 
 it out." 
 District Attorney: "Answer my question." 
 
 Judge: "Answer his question." 
 
 Flagg: "McConville told them if they 
 would plead guilty and pay a small fine they 
 would be discharged." 
 
 District Attorney: "I move, your Honor, 
 to have that crossed from the records." 
 
 A Juryman: "I would like to have the 
 facts." 
 
 Flagg (to Judge) : "May I give the facts 
 to the jury?" 
 
 District Attorney: "I object." 
 
 Flagg: "Naturally, you object." 
 
 Judge (to Flagg): Any more of this and 
 1 shall fine you for contempt." 
 
 Flagg (to jury) : "City Marshall Gano"
 
 39 
 
 District Attorney: "I object! object! 1" 
 
 Judge: "Objection overruled." 
 
 Flagg (to jury) : "City Marshall Gano noti- 
 fied Captain Lynch, June 3d, 1895, that at 
 my request he had served dispossess papers 
 on eight tenants in the building 225 West 
 1 8th Street and that Judge Joseph H. Steiner 
 of the Eighth District Court had given the ten- 
 ants until June 10th, 1895, to vacate. They 
 were therefore no longer under my jurisdic- 
 tion. I had no legal right to put them out. 
 And Captain Lynch of the Sixteenth Precinct 
 knew it; even knew I was to receive no rent, 
 and yet, during this extension of time, June 
 3d to June 10th, 1895, granted by Judge 
 Steiner, he, Lynch, raided these tenants who 
 in reality and legally were no longer my ten- 
 ants and arrested me. They told me that 
 McConville had told them if they would plead 
 guilty and swear I knew they were using my 
 flats for immoral purposes they would be dis- 
 charged. Three did plead guilty, and were 
 discharged in the Jefferson Market Police 
 Court. The remaining five who refused to 
 commit perjury were in jail four days and then 
 discharged as there was no evidence against 
 them. I also was discharged in the Special 
 Sessions Court." 
 
 This is the only case on record where three 
 "inmates" of an alleged disorderly house paid 
 fines because they could be coerced into swear- 
 ing falsely and the "keeper" and five other 
 "inmates" of the same house, on identically 
 the same evidence honorably discharged be- 
 cause they could not be coerced into swearing 
 falsely. 
 
 No threat, cell, or promise of immunity 
 could make me acknowledge I was guilty when 
 not guilty. But, it was to be expected that 
 out of the great number of illegally arrested
 
 40 
 
 young women some would swear to anything 
 to regain their freedom. 
 
 Before, during and after my trial the animu* 
 evinced by Barney McConville, the ex-truck 
 driver, was beyond belief. 
 
 I shall never forget a certain afternoon 
 when walking to the West Twentieth Street 
 station house with him and officer Rohrig. 
 My right wrist was chained to Rohrig and as 
 we turned the corner of 1 8th Street and 
 Seventh Avenue McConville said: "I wish to 
 God I was now leading you to the 'chair' and 
 was to be the one to touch the button that 
 would send you to Hell" accompanying this 
 remark with an unprintable oath. 
 
 Shortly after my trial McConville was 
 promoted. The newspapers when eulo- 
 gizing him at the time said he was raised 
 to the rank of lieutenant owing to his 
 effective work in the "Flagg case." He 
 did work pretty hard. No matter in 
 what part of the city a flat of mine might 
 be illegally raided it was McConville's function 
 to lead me to the West 20th Street station 
 house and he was "right on the job." I was 
 usually arrested shortly after breakfast, then 
 again in the afternoon and occasionally in the 
 evening. First I was in, then out and then 
 in again, and it was difficult to attend to 
 business. 
 
 The situation was simply this: the police 
 who had failed to extort money had had me 
 indicted; and I who had failed to force my 
 -case to an issue had had them indicted. Now 
 to be reinstated, it was necessary for them to 
 have me convicted. If convicted they could 
 then move to have the indictment against them 
 dismissed on the ground I was unworthy of 
 belief. This was the reason they were so 
 eager to "frame up" a case against me. I
 
 41 
 
 quote the words of my lawyer addressing the 
 jury: "It was admitted in open court by District 
 Attorney Fellows himself that this prosecution 
 held the balance for Police Captains Price and 
 Donohue, and that other members of the force 
 are in danger; that the charges against them 
 might be multiplied; that Captain Price is 
 awaiting the fate of the indictment against him; 
 that the police have been so informed in this 
 court house and by the District Attorney of 
 this County in person, at the Bar of the Court 
 of Oyer and Terminer, that upon the outcome 
 of this prosecution against Jared Flagg depends 
 the fate of these police captains and detectives. 
 
 So you see the terrible influence at work 
 from this police center to induce you to convict 
 this defendant!" 
 
 Realizing the unfair means adopted by the 
 police to ruin my reputation in order to save 
 their own I felt that if their illicit acts could 
 be ventilated in court it would go a long way 
 towards helping me vindicate my name. If 
 there is to be a fight the people want to see a 
 fair fight. Figuratively, I had been knocked 
 down by a foul blow and I wanted to stand 
 up and fight for my rights. Our greatest 
 glory is not in never falling but in rising every 
 time we fall. But there were others who 
 cared nothing for my rights, who were interest- 
 ed only in themselves; whose only desire was 
 to see the matter "hushed up." They felt that 
 there had already been too much publicity. 
 "Never mind about your name, let it be for- 
 gotten; never mind about vindication; never 
 mind what the public may think of you, we 
 stand high in its estimation and cannot afford 
 to have your case go to trial owing to the 
 stigma which will attach itself to a case of this 
 character." This is what certain relatives of 
 mine said; but they were not near relatives; 
 not brothers, sisters or parents.
 
 42 
 
 Late one afternoon one of these relatives 
 called. He found me in my bedroom; I had 
 no office; I was a bankrupt; and the following 
 conversation took place: "Judging from your 
 environment you seem pressed for ready 
 cash." 
 
 "I am." 
 
 "The only time money will do you any good 
 is when you have none. You make money 
 but what do you do with it? You are not a 
 drinking man. Do you gamble it away? he 
 asked. 
 
 "Never lost a dollar gambling." 
 
 "But you have lost everything?" 
 
 "Everything." I said. 
 
 "Even your reputation?" 
 
 "Yes." 
 
 "Well," said he, "you have disgraced us; 
 look at your brothers; see the position they 
 hold in society; I should think you would want 
 to hang your head in shame and sink into 
 oblivion, yet I see by the papers you con- 
 template airing yourself in a public court. 
 When does your case come to trial?" 
 
 "It is now on the Calendar and liable to be 
 reached at any time," I remarked. 
 
 "You know best, but if I were in your posi- 
 tion I know what I would do." 
 
 "What?" I asked. 
 
 "Quietly pack my trunk and cross the pond." 
 
 "If it would cramp you financially to cross 
 the river how could you cross the ocean?" I 
 inquired. 
 
 "Don't let that worry you; you will be 
 supplied with funds; I will arrange all that." 
 
 "What! You advise me to run away, leave 
 the country?" 
 
 "This is not the only country." he said. 
 
 "But it is my only country, and you advise
 
 43 
 
 me, an innocent man, to leave it forever?" 
 "It might be best." he thought. 
 "Best! How best? Are you aware that I 
 have committed no crime have done no 
 wrong? I am charged with having committed 
 a misdemeanor, but that is not a felony, and 
 even if convicted though innocent I would 
 still be as much a citizen of the United States 
 as you." 
 
 "That's not the question," interposed my 
 relative, "we do not say you are guilty it i 
 the notoriety we dread. 
 
 "But I will be acquitted vindicated." 
 "That makes no difference. The papers 
 will talk and this notoriety is offensive to the 
 family. We have a name to preserve." 
 
 "Yes," I said, "but have I no right to defend 
 myself? How about my name? 
 
 "It will be forgotten. If you go away it 
 will all die out; people forget; and we will not 
 be subjected to this everlasting scandal." 
 
 "And to end it you would have me become 
 a fugitive from justice, a criminal in reality?" 
 "I do not say that," he said. 
 "But that is what it means," said I. "It 
 means that you would have me become an 
 exile; would have me leave my native country 
 and go to some foreign land, never to return, 
 isolated, banished for life from kindred, friends 
 and all I hold dear. It means you would have 
 me leave them all, violate my oath, forfeit my 
 bail bond and go." 
 
 "Your bondsman is rich! he would not 
 care." 
 
 "Not care! and on my bond for seven 
 thousand dollars?" 
 
 "It's a bagatelle to him," my relative re- 
 marked. 
 
 "But he is a friend, a real friend, he is 
 trusting me, he has confidence; and you would
 
 44 
 
 ask me to shatter that confidence, betray that 
 friendship and abscond, run away, sneak 
 away? Oh! no not I! Never! Not if I 
 were to be electrocuted I You do not know 
 me; I am not one of that kind. When my 
 case comes up, when the Clerk of the Court 
 calls out, 'Jared Flagg to the bar,' you will see 
 me there! I will face my accusers, and if the 
 case goes against me will take my medicine 
 like a man. There's the door Good-day."
 
 45 
 
 CHAPTER 3 
 
 When a person of wealth is accused of a 
 crime and escapes punishment we attribute it 
 to his money; but in my case the money wa 
 on the other side. Everything tending to mili- 
 tate against me the police possessed. They 
 pulled "every wire," controlled every wheel 
 of the vast machinery; and what is more 
 worked them for all they were worth. 
 
 When Theodore Roosevelt heard of th 
 underhanded tactics he was incensed. The 
 records of the police board meeting, held 
 August 9, 1895, show that he declared I wa 
 being persecuted and that he proposed to have 
 it stopped; and it was no fault of his that it 
 did not stop. He did everything in his power 
 to see that justice should be done, but what 
 could one man outside of "Tammany" ac- 
 complish against an army entrenched in the 
 Fourteenth Street Wigwam? 
 
 In this connection I insert a copy of a letter 
 sent to Mr. Roosevelt by A. F. Dennett, 
 
 "SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF 
 
 CRIME. 
 No. 105 East 22d Street, 
 
 New York, August 12, 1895 
 Theodore Roosevelt, Esq., Police Com. 
 
 300 Muberry Street, New York 
 Dear Sir:- 
 
 I notice by the papers that you are going 
 to give Jared Flagg a hearing. I think you 
 are right and am sure Mr. Flagg will be able 
 to back up all his statements. While I do 
 not regard him as a saint by any means yet 
 I feel sure he has been persecuted by the
 
 46 
 
 police since he went before the Extra- 
 ordinary Grand Jury and they have retaliated 
 by driving him out of business. 
 Yours truly, 
 
 A. F. DENNETT, Superintendent." 
 Doctor Parkhurst was also incensed when 
 the facts were placed before him. 
 
 Ordinarily a mere misdemeanor could have 
 been disposed of in ten minutes, but there was 
 more to my case than appeared on its surface. 
 The bad name of the department was at stake. 
 If a police officer considered it wise to pay 
 fifteen thousand dollars to be made a captain, 
 and in 1895, this was the market price, the 
 amount demanded for the privilege of black- 
 mailing people in his precinct; what was to 
 become of him if suspended? Where did hit 
 fifteen thousand come in? Who was to make 
 good? These were momentous questions. 
 No wonder the court room was packed to the 
 doors with policemen. 
 
 In all the history of New York, in all the 
 history of the police department, I was the 
 first citizen to have two police captains indict- 
 ed and suspended. I had according to their 
 code of ethics set a bad precedent. I had 
 given testimony and the Grand Jury had be- 
 lieved me. It was now up to them the police 
 to impeach this testimony, not only that 
 Donohue and Price might be reinstated but 
 that the bad name of the "department" might 
 be perpetuated; in plain English, that the 
 captains might be able to bulldoze and rob the 
 people in the future as they had in the past. 
 With this end in view several detectives turned 
 out to assist the Prosecuting Attorney and they 
 "rounded up" quite an array of "street- 
 walkers" and "stool-pigeons" all eager to 
 curry favor by testifying according to in- 
 structions. To gaze on this throng; to see
 
 47 
 
 THEODORE ROOSEVELT 
 
 v (Now President of the United States) 
 Testifying to the injustice of the charges brought 
 
 against JABBD FL.AGG. 
 [A reprint from the New York World of Feb. 26, 1896]
 
 49 
 
 the court room packed with officers; to see 
 the pompous District Attorney and his as- 
 sistant, the "silver-tongued" orater, Lewis, and 
 other attorneys pouring over voluminous port- 
 folios filled with reams of typewritten matter, 
 lying depositions, which had taken months to 
 compile; to see them with their heads together 
 and every now and then beckoning to some 
 inspector, captain or detective, to come in- 
 side the railing; to see official messengers 
 dashing hither and thither, forcing their way 
 through the throng as though it were a matter 
 of life or death to obey orders promptly; a 
 casual observer would have supposed where 
 there was so much smoke there must be some 
 fire, some evidence to convict; but it was all 
 one stupendous bluff there was nothing to it 
 and the witnesses who were to have said so 
 much, when placed under oath and warned by 
 the judge of the penalty of perjury, wilted, and 
 their accusations proved to be mere exhalations 
 of "hot air." But this was not the case with 
 my witnesses, and if any person who questions 
 the authenticity of any statement herein con- 
 tained will inspect the records of my trial on 
 file in the General Sessions Court he will be 
 convinced of this fact. He will read in black 
 and white what Theodore Roosevelt and 
 Doctor Parkhurst had to say in my behalf. 
 
 It was due to no outside influence that these 
 men came forward to defend me. I was not 
 introduced to them by influential relatives. 
 No man amounts to anything who travels on 
 another man's reputation. I introduced my- 
 self; went to them as man to man and asked 
 to have my statements investigated. "If," 
 said I, "you become convinced I am being per- 
 secuted I want you to stand by me." And they 
 promised, if convinced, to do so. Neither 
 Roosevelt nor Parkhurst will stand UD for a
 
 50 
 
 man simply to accommodate him; they must 
 know what they are doing; must know the 
 facts, the man, his past record, before they 
 will take the stand and defend him under oath. 
 Therefore, it was not until they became con- 
 vinced after a full and impartial investigation 
 that they promised to come forward to support 
 me in my defense. 
 
 Could money or influence influence such 
 witnesses? Then why assert without knowing 
 the facts that I have been guilty of wrong doing 
 when men of this calibre knowing all the facts 
 testify to the contrary? 
 
 There is a difference between "hearsay" and 
 real evidence. "Hearsay evidence" is never 
 admissible in a court of law. Roosevelt and 
 Parkhurst demanded real evidence, and it is 
 owing to the fact they received such evidence 
 that they did not qualify statements or mince 
 matters. 
 
 When the suave and oily Prosecutor Lewis 
 pleadingly asked Doctor Parkhurst in his 
 sweetest and most persuasive tone of voice if 
 he really wanted the jury to understand that 
 he the Doctor had absolute confidence in 
 Mr. Flagg's word, Doctor Parkhurst, answered, 
 as per official court record, "Yes, sir! That is 
 just what I wish the jury to believe." 
 
 By asking this question Prosecutor Lewis 
 established my reputation for veracity. Here 
 was Doctor Parkhurst of world-wide fame 
 testifying in open court, and when asked if he 
 had absolute confidence in my word (without 
 qualification) said (and I am quoting from 
 the court records) :- "When Jared Flagg 
 makes a statement I believe him." 
 
 This reply was so different from what Prose- 
 cutor Lewis expected that it made him dizzy, 
 and he was quick to use his smelling salt* 
 which fortunately he had with him.
 
 51 
 
 REV. DR. C. H. PARKHURST 
 
 (President of the Society for the Prevention of Crime) 
 "When Jared Flagg makes a statement to me 
 
 I believe him." 
 reprint from the New York Herald of Feb. 26, 1896]
 
 53 
 
 In important trials we frequently hear the 
 question asked, "Will the defendant take the 
 stand?" It would seem that any person, 
 guilty or not guilty, if accused would want to 
 say a good word for himself. But the moment 
 he does, a hundred or more may testify 
 against him. The moment an accused person 
 takes the witness stand, that moment, in the 
 language of lawyers, "he opens the door" and 
 opposing lawyers are no longer legally con- 
 fined to the specific charge for which he is on 
 trial. By taking the stand he places hi 
 character at stake. His past life, his record, 
 is at issue; and if it can be shown by witnesses 
 that his reputation is questionable their testi- 
 mony can be used against him in arriving at 
 a verdict. But if he refrains from taking the 
 stand in his own behalf, evidence relating only 
 to the specific charge of which he is accused 
 can be submitted and considered by the judge 
 and jury. This explains why lawyers when 
 defending clients with "shady reputations" pre- 
 fer not to permit them to take the stand. But 
 my character is not and was not "shady;" my 
 past life was clean; cross-examination had no 
 terrors for me; there was, there is, no page in 
 the book of my life that cannot be opened. 
 Therefore I took the stand, which was equiva- 
 lent to saying, if any person in this community 
 or in any community has aught to say against 
 my character bring him in; "the door is open;" 
 I am here waiting to confront him. 
 
 But did anyone enter? Not a soul who 
 could question my veracity or character; not 
 even those whom I charged with attempted ex- 
 tortion. 
 
 I quote the words of my lawyer:- "Jared 
 Flagg has lived in this community twenty-five 
 years. He has borne a good reputation as the 
 evidence in this case proves. Not one human
 
 54 
 
 being has appeared against it; the door was 
 open and Mr. Flagg invited attack by taking 
 the stand and his Honor will so charge you. 
 When we put his character in issue we offered 
 conflict to the Prosecution. It was a challenge 
 to put upon the witness stand any man or 
 woman who from the beginning of the de- 
 fendant's life down to the day of his trial 
 could assert aught against him. 
 
 Yet, with all the venom evinced in this 
 case; with the terrible consequences to the 
 police of a verdict of acquittal to incite their 
 zeal and awaken malicious inquiry; with all 
 the police officers involved in this prosecution; 
 with Donohue who was indicted; with Price 
 hanging between heaven and earth on the re- 
 sult of this case; with the incentive terribly im- 
 pressing itself upon him; throughout this broad 
 land, in all the days of this trial, not one human 
 creature could be found to come upon that 
 stand to say that Jared Flagg was not a peace- 
 able man, an honorable man, a moral man and 
 a good citizen. 
 
 He stands unchallenged, uncontradicted, 
 unsullied before you upon the witness stand, 
 without as the evidence in this case shows 
 a blemish upon his name." 
 
 The Court Record shows that my lawyer 
 was not interrupted when making the fore- 
 going statement notwithstanding that District 
 Attorney Fellows and five assistants were 
 listening and eagerly waiting for half a chance 
 to "call him down." 
 
 When he informed the jury that I stood un- 
 challenged, uncontradicted upon the witness 
 stand without as the evidence showed a blemish 
 upon my name the Prosecuting Attorneys re- 
 mained silent; had it not been true, all six 
 would in the "twinkling of an eye" have been 
 on their feet objecting.
 
 55 
 
 They kept me in the witness chair three 
 days; I was cross-examined by five different 
 attorneys and although the Record shows 
 that not one word of my testimony was con- 
 tradicted no mention of this fact was made by 
 the newspapers; on the contrary certain editors 
 and persons intimated that the charge of 
 blackmail was set up by me that I might pose 
 as a persecuted person. 
 
 For a year prior to my trial Captains Dono- 
 hue and Price had been going about inter- 
 viewing reporters and telling politicians with 
 a "pull" and ministers with influence that I had 
 invented this yarn about blackmailing simply 
 to awaken public sympathy. All this talk had 
 its effect. It affected Father Ducey and it 
 moved the Reverand J. A. B. Wilson to such 
 an extent that he felt constrained not only to 
 lunch with me but to appear against me at my 
 trial. 
 
 I quote from the Record:- Mr. Flagg: "Mr. 
 Wilson called at my apartment and said if I 
 would manifest a contrite spirit, admit I was 
 a sinner, withdraw my charges against the 
 police, and incidentally defray the cost of 
 having electricity installed in his church located 
 on Eighteenth Street, West of Eighth Avenue, 
 he would intercede for me at the Throne of 
 Grace and pray that I might be saved from the 
 wrath of the world to come." 
 
 Persons who believe one side of a story until 
 they hear the other said they did not believe 
 any member of New Yorks "Finest" would 
 stoop to blackmail; but why did not the police 
 say so? Why did not Donohue and Price say 
 so when I on the witness stand accused them to 
 their faces of attempted extortion? They 
 heard me. Why did they not deny it? If it 
 were not true why did they not have me sent 
 to prison for perjury? I will tell you why.
 
 56 
 
 There is no law against lying. Every day con- 
 versational lying is permissible not punish- 
 able; but there is a law against perjury, which 
 is testifying falsely under oath. Had these 
 police captains sworn to the lies in court that 
 they told out of court I would have had them 
 convicted of perjury. This is a pretty good 
 reason and this is the only reason why they did 
 not dare to contradict me. 
 
 If a man makes a statement under oath 
 realizing the consequences of making a false 
 statement and another man also realizing the 
 gravity of an oath says, I do not object to lying 
 a little out of court, but do not ask me to go 
 into court and swear to the Ijes I have told out 
 of court which of the two is worthy of belief? 
 
 What I said against the police I said in court 
 and under oath. What the police said against 
 me was said out of court and not under oath. 
 
 I quote from my lawyer: "Donohue will have 
 his character assailed; will be charged on the 
 oath of Mr. Flagg with attempted extortion. 
 and that is the last we see of Donohue. The 
 District Attorney closes his case and I will stop 
 my case right here. I will surrender every 
 right, every privilege that I have and agree, if 
 the District Attorney will call Captain Donohue 
 to the stand to permit him to do so." 
 
 Why did not Donohue or the District At- 
 torney consider it expedient to accept this 
 offer? 
 
 And Price, what did he have to say for him- 
 self? 
 
 I quote from my lawyer: "Price will have 
 his character assailed, will be charged on the 
 oath of Mr. Flagg with having attempted to 
 extort a bribe from him and that is the last we 
 see of Mr. Captain Price in his full buttoned 
 and imposing uniform. Mr. Flagg is here, but 
 the conspirators are hidden somewhere, afraid
 
 57 
 
 to face the jury that they have impaneled to 
 try the crimes they have imputed to Mr. Flagg." 
 
 The witness who furnished the only fact 
 upon which to hinge the action against me was 
 an aged woman who lived on the top floor of 
 a tenement house located on West Nineteenth 
 Street. This woman complained that my 
 tenants were on the roof one Summer night in 
 1 895, and disturbed her by singing the popular 
 ditty entitled "She is the Sunshine of Paradise 
 Alley." And for this "crime" I was sentenced 
 to serve thirty days in the city prison and pay 
 a fine of five hundred dollars. Under cross- 
 examination she would not say it was after mid- 
 night when the notes from the tuneful refrain 
 first reached her ears, but she would swear 
 she was in bed. Barring the testimony of this 
 one witness the jury disregarded as unworthy 
 of belief every word of testimony submitted 
 against me. And when twelve disinterested 
 men listen for ten long days and evenings to 
 evidence it is reasonable to presume that they 
 are better qualified to render a correct verdict 
 than those who base their opinion on hearsay 
 or newspaper reports. To say that these men 
 failed to do their duty; to say I am guilty and 
 only happened to crawl out by luck is equiva- 
 lent to saying that those who were not there, 
 who heard no evidence and saw no witnesses, 
 know more about the inside facts than those 
 who were there and who heard and saw it all. 
 
 To say that this jury the twelve men there 
 sitting answerable to their Maker men who 
 had sworn, each of them, "So help me God 
 I will decide this case upon the evidence", 
 to say they did not do so when they brought 
 in the verdict, "Not Guilty of renting flats to 
 be used for immoral purposes or maintain- 
 ing disorderly houses", is equivalent to saying 
 that each one of them is a liar. No conscien-
 
 58 
 
 tious person would make such a remark. Yet, 
 flippant individuals the kind who know it all 
 have made this assertion. 
 
 "A general impression prevails", they say, 
 but "general impressions" are not evidence. 
 
 The Prosecuting Attorney, in his opening 
 speech said, "A general impression prevails, 
 but I am going to submit for the conscientious 
 consideration of the jurors something more 
 material than general impressions." And 
 placing his hand on a stack of clap-trap illegal 
 documents more than a foot high, said and 
 I am quoting his words "I have here indis- 
 putable evidence, and am prepared to prove, 
 will prove by it, and by reputable and dis- 
 interested witnesses, that the defendant is 
 guilty of every allegation contained in the in- 
 dictments." 
 
 He made this assertion to intensify the "gen- 
 eral impression", the impression that those not 
 personally acquainted with me then held, 
 namely, that I was ''a bad man." 
 
 But a few days later, after he had submit- 
 ted his evidence for the "conscientious con- 
 sideration" of the jurors, after every disreput- 
 able and interested witness he could muster had 
 been heard, what was it that induced the 
 jury to ignore his alleged "indisputable evi- 
 dence" and "disinterested witnesses", and to 
 throw out and dismiss twenty-four of the twen- 
 ty-five counts contained in the indictments? 
 
 Let those wiseacres answer this if they can! 
 
 The jury acquitted me of the charge of keep- 
 ing disorderly houses, knowingly renting flats 
 for immoral purposes, violating the excise law 
 and of every other charge with the exception of 
 one, and there was nothing immoral in con- 
 nection with this one count. It was the most 
 insignificant of them all that which charged 
 me with maintaining a nuisance by having ten- 
 ants with operatic inclinations.
 
 59 
 
 If such a verdict was not a vindication I 
 would like to know the definition of the word 
 "vindication". 
 
 This petty offense, for which any owner 
 of flat property might be held accountable, 
 was the only thing for which I was ever 
 placed on trial and yet columns have been 
 written by men who were paid because 
 they possessed the faculty of writting 
 sensationally. To write as I am writing, 
 the truth, is easy. A schoolboy could record 
 facts but to artistically distort the truth re- 
 quires talent. The scribes who have featured 
 me possessed talent and as a result of their 
 aptitude in juggling words thousands have been 
 led to talk. They have talked behind my back; 
 they have insinuated, intimated, suspected, 
 surmised, presumed, assumed, asserted and de- 
 clared that the innuendoes heaped upon me 
 were true, but what have they proved? Noth- 
 ing! Absolutely nothing! 
 
 From the day I was born, from the day I 
 left my native town, New Haven, a boy of 
 fifteen, and came to New York to earn my live- 
 lihood, down to the day of my trial, no human 
 being has ever been able to produce a scintil- 
 la of evidence to prove or to show or even 
 tending to show that I am not an honest man, 
 a law-abiding man, and a man of decent mor- 
 al character.
 
 60 
 
 CHAPTER 4 
 
 Only a few minutes after the verdict had 
 been brought in the afternoon papers issued 
 extras: ''Flagg Guilty." 
 
 "My God, he's guilty!" people said as they 
 rolled up their eyes and spoke in stage whis- 
 pers. But guilty of what? To this day not 
 one person in a thousand can answer that 
 question. Even those who should have ascer- 
 tained the truth before placing me under a 
 ban know little or nothing about the matter. 
 There are two sides to every story and thig 
 is the first time my side has appeared in print 
 but do not imagine I am posing as a martyr. 
 The wrongs endured by me are trivial com- 
 pared to the woes of some others. In the 
 name of justice unjust acts are constantly com- 
 mitted. Under the head of news falsehoods 
 are circulated. Had the press informed the 
 people of the real offense for which I was ad- 
 judged guilty I would make no protest; but for 
 sensationalism which means circulation the 
 truth was perverted. 
 
 From an editor's standpoint nothing suc- 
 ceeds like circulation, and what did these edi- 
 tors care for me? I have sued half the news- 
 papers in the City; and as I have never insti- 
 tuted a suit without provocation I have sel- 
 dom lost one. Yet whatever cash damages 
 I have received will not obliterate from the 
 minds of the persons who have read the ar- 
 ticles the impressions formed. Nothing has 
 appeared or will appear in the papers to show
 
 61 
 
 that these articles were false or that the pub- 
 lishers had to pay damages for publishing 
 them. Editors would not consider such news 
 sufficiently sensational to interest the public. 
 
 Certain persons entrusted by the people to 
 administer the law impartially have been par- 
 tial in their treatment of me. Yet I am told 
 that I have reason to be thankful I did not 
 lose my life. When I think of the gun-men, 
 the "stool pigeons" and the corrupt police 
 influence, I suppose I ought to be thankful I 
 am still on earth. 
 
 It would be interesting if some person, who 
 could, would explain why they took my case, 
 a paltry misdemeanor, to the General Ses- 
 sions Court, a tribunal in which only felons 
 and murderers are tried. The records show 
 that no person accused of a misdemeanor was 
 ever tried there before or has ever been tried 
 there since. 
 
 What kind of political influence enabled 
 them to block the wheels of this great temple 
 of justice for almost a fortnight while the at- 
 torneys wrangled over the morality of my ten- 
 ants? 
 
 Why was it that they exacted from me bail 
 bonds ten times as large, ten times as great as 
 was ever known to have been exacted from 
 persons charged with misdemeanors? In my 
 case Judge Newburger refused as security for 
 ten thousand dollars, a bond backed by an 
 equity of one hundred and twenty thousand 
 dollars on improved city property. I quote the 
 words of my lawyer to the court: "I will put 
 the District Attorney's office to the challenge 
 that there is not a man indicted for man- 
 slaughter today whose bail approximates that 
 amount." 
 
 Why should they have demanded of me free 
 and clear property appraised by the city at ten
 
 62 
 
 times the amount of the bond required? Why 
 did they discriminate against me? The pen- 
 alty inflicted for a first offense is usually less 
 severe than for a second. Why was this rule 
 not applicable to my case? The records show 
 that the extreme penalty imposed for a simi- 
 lar first offense (maintaining a nuisance) was 
 ten days or ten dollars; if a bum, ten days 
 "on the island;" if a gentleman, a ten dollar 
 fine. But see what they did to me! Does 
 the law seek to degrade a person before he 
 is tried, or is a person in "the eyes of the law" 
 to be regarded innocent until proven guilty? 
 At divers times, two years before I could force 
 them to bring my case to trial, they dragged 
 me through the streets like some captured out- 
 law. I was, and I am, a citizen of the United 
 States. I v/as charged with an offense the na- 
 ture of which was not serious. Had I been 
 adjudged guilty of every count in every in 
 dictment found against me I would still have 
 been a citizen and entitled to all the rights 
 of a citizen. 
 
 This is the truth this is law. Therefore, 
 is there a law-abiding person in the United 
 States who has the temerity to say that he ap- 
 proves of a fellow-citizen being humiliated in 
 broad daylight, on the public streets, as I was? 
 Unless you approve of this form of persecu- 
 tion you should not decry and help to bring 
 discredit on me foi< having been subjected 
 to it. 
 
 The people as a whole have nothing against 
 me and wanted me to have a fair trial; but 
 it so happened that the servants of the people 
 betrayed the confidence of the people and re- 
 sorted to trickery. Why were the police so 
 bitterly disposed toward me? It was because 
 I would not submit to their demands. No 
 honorable man innocent of wrongdoing would;
 
 63 
 
 ut a dishonorable man might pay "hush 
 money" to continue an unlawful business. Be- 
 cause my business was lawful I wouldn't, and 
 if on this account the police with the help of 
 the newspapers blasted my reputation do 
 you consider it just to join with them and so 
 assist in keeping me down? All I ask is fair 
 play; give your fellow-citizen a fair chance; 
 do not "damn him" without being able to give 
 a reason. 
 
 All through from beginning to end I 
 have been persecuted, not prosecuted, and it 
 is about time there should be a "let up". 
 
 For years I have been my own master 
 
 have worked for myself and not counting 
 a trip abroad have given myself two vacations* 
 a ten and a five day outing. It is not work 
 that kills us, it is recreation; and barring these 
 fifteen days I have not missed a day from 
 (when in) business in all these years. 
 
 Because I do not go through life with a 
 careworn expression and because I appreciate 
 good fellowship does that mean I am lacking 
 in principle? I am not ashamed to admit 
 I enjoy life and the good things in it to the 
 utmost. There have been but few days in 
 my life that I would not like to go back to 
 and live over. The fact that I have not been 
 sick fifty minutes in fifty years sick enough 
 to lie down should explode the theory that 
 I have lived too festive a life. 
 
 My precepts on health and happiness follow; 
 
 Never do anything in a hurry. So vital is 
 this that if ignored every other rule relating 
 to health becomes a joke. Eat slowly, drink 
 slowly, smoke slowly, and if occasionally it 
 will afford you pleasure to make yourself 
 miserable by losing your temper lose it slowly. 
 
 Do not anticipate trouble. We all see more 
 or less trouble most of which never happens.
 
 64 
 
 So do not let fear interfere with your pleasure. 
 
 Do not make a tragedy of a comedy by 
 taking life too seriously; yet if you have real 
 cause to worry, worry by all means if it will 
 help matters. If it will not, do not. 
 
 Do not make a Hell on earth for yourself 
 by becoming "soured" on the world and 
 blaming all for the unjust acts of a few; or in- 
 jure yourself by nursing a grudge against any- 
 one. 
 
 And above all things do not sap your 
 vitality by associating with persons who pride 
 themselves on being so delicately sensitive 
 that they are always fancying themselves 
 slighted. 
 
 It may not be pleasant to be slighted, and 
 it is not pleasant to be vilified, yet, if it 
 pleases some to vilify me, let them "damn 
 away." I do not like it; I want to stop it; I 
 am going to stop it if I can; but, if I cannot, I 
 am not going to fret over it. 
 
 As an example of the vilification, the in- 
 justice, visited upon me and the discriminating 
 enforcement of the law, take the case of Police 
 Captain Price and compare it with my own. 
 I took the stand in my own defense, I laid my 
 life bare and was acquitted of every charge 
 pertaining to dishonesty and immorality, but 
 was found guilty of a petty misdemeanor 
 (maintaining a nuisance) ; and immediately 
 thereafter, on the strength of this, Captain 
 Price (with a record so black that even the 
 thought of having his past life investigated in 
 court was enough to make him run like 
 "a whipped cur" was relieved of the charge 
 of a felony. 
 
 The moment I was convicted (of maintaining 
 a nuisance) the indictment against Price was 
 dismissed; and he was not only reinstated but 
 assigned to a precinct where he could with
 
 63 
 
 impunity, under the protection and in the 
 name of the law, persecute the man who had 
 dared to accuse him in open court of attempted 
 blackmail. And be it said to his shame he was 
 not dilatory in availing himself of the op- 
 portunity. 
 
 Clothe a desperado with police power and 
 you have a dare-devil that no freebooter in 
 the country can rival. He will draw the line 
 at nothing; put up any job; swear away any 
 person's liberty or life to settle a grudge. 
 Price had a grudge against me and with all 
 the swaggering bravado and foul-mouthed in- 
 solence of an unprincipled police captain 
 vowed he would have satisfaction. 
 
 Now it appears that out of the wreck I had 
 saved one piece of property consisting of two 
 flat buildings located on West Thirty-third 
 Street near Broadway. I held a forty-two 
 year ground lease on this property. It was 
 claimed by Price that one of my tenants had 
 invited some friends to have a sociable game 
 of cards. He further claimed that a dispute 
 arose and one of the guests stabbed another 
 with a hatpin. The visitor supposed to have 
 been pricked with the pin could not be found. 
 The alleged stabber could be found but was not 
 arrested. The hatpin was alleged by Price to 
 be the property of the wife of the lessee of 
 the flat, both of whom put in a general denial 
 But I, who was not on the premises at the time 
 the game was alleged to have been played, was 
 arrested by Price and held without bonds for 
 examination on the ground that I was an 
 accessory before the fact implicated in what 
 might prove to be murder. 
 
 I have never posed as a saint, but this im- 
 putation, murder in any degree, was the 
 "straw that broke the camel's back;" and 
 although Price was reprimanded by the Judge
 
 66 
 
 and the case thrown out of court I then and 
 there "threw up the sponge," threw away my 
 forty-two year ground lease (which has since 
 been sold at an advance of one hundred 
 thousand dollars over the price it had cost me) 
 and quit the flat business a bankrupt. 
 
 The enthusiasm was pretty well knocked 
 out of me, and when you lose your enthusiasm 
 you lose your opportunities; yet I kept alive, 
 lived for a year or two without knowing how I 
 lived. Then things instead of getting better 
 got worse; and I existed for a year or two 
 without knowing how I existed. 
 
 Had any member of my family known the 
 position in which I was placed he or she 
 would have come to my rescue. But as I felt 
 1 had no one to blame but myself I kept to 
 myself. In making this statement I am not 
 exonerating the police or the newspapers but 
 the members of my family and my friends. 
 I had friends, but they were few and far 
 between. People like to draw close to af- 
 fluence but they instinctively draw away from 
 poverty; therefore, if a person's resources are 
 circumscribed it behooves him to keep making 
 new acquaintances all the time, otherwise in a 
 short time he will find himself sitting high and 
 dry without a friend in the world. 
 
 In 1 898 I found myself sitting in a small 
 room on the top floor of a building that could 
 not be called modern. I had a few callers, 
 not counting creditors, and one of these callers 
 was named George D. Smith. Smith was a 
 friend, and is to this day. Smith would work 
 for a salary when he could get it. When he 
 could not he would work without it, and it 
 was due to this noble trait in his character that 
 he worked for me so many years. 
 
 He was with me when I was up in the world ; 
 when I was down in the world; when I was a
 
 07 
 
 creditor; when I was a debtor; and when 
 hundreds of my creditors were howling around 
 me like ravenous wolves. He was with ms 
 when I ascended from the depths of poverty 
 and when I descended to the depths of 
 poverty; when I dined at Delmonico's; when 
 1 dined at the Diary Kitchen; and when 1 
 dined on a loaf of bread; but through it all, 
 in fair weather and in stormy, he was always 
 the same cheerful and considerate. 
 
 The first day he walked into my top-story 
 room he was considerate he had a loaf of 
 bread under his arm he did not know whether 
 I had dined, and during our repast the follow- 
 ing conversation took place: 
 
 "What do they tax you for this place?" 
 asked Smith. 
 
 "Ten dollars," said I. 
 
 "Not a week?" 
 
 "No a month." 
 
 "And how long have you been here?" 
 
 "Almost a month." 
 
 "Did you have to pay any money on account 
 of the rent before taking possession?" 
 Paid all." 
 
 "All? In advance?" asked Smith 
 
 "We are not all gifted," said I. "You are 
 the only person with whom I am acquainted 
 possessing the faculty of residing in this town 
 without paying rent." 
 
 "I pay when I can; when I can't I do the 
 next best thing move you know how I am 
 situatecl," said Smith. 
 
 "Yes, we are both in the same boat, and on 
 the first of the month I may move. Tom, the 
 colored watchman, tells me the landlord is 
 going to ask me to vacate." 
 
 "And pray why? You paid one month's 
 rent," said Smith. "You must have a queer 
 landlord if he is afraid to trust you for the 
 next three months."
 
 68 
 
 "That's not it,, I answered. "It's not a 
 question of money but of morality." 
 
 Then I explained how a few of my former 
 tenants hearing that I was in hard luck had 
 called; not to ask if there was something they 
 might do, but to do something to actually 
 offer me money. Until then I did not realize 
 there was so much goodness in the world. 
 And I continued Smith listened "Some of 
 my neighbors probably having read and be- 
 lieved without knowing, took it for granted I 
 should have no callers. They probably inti- 
 mated. Neighbors like to intimate things and 
 one old fossil on the floor below intimated I 
 was fond of women." 
 
 "Fond of women," soliloquized Smith, 
 "and a man who is not, is no man, or he is a 
 man with a diseased mind. Must you live the 
 life of a hermit? Have you no right to receive 
 callers? Suppose you were doing business 
 here and had customers, callers, would your 
 landlord object?" 
 
 "Perhaps not," I replied. 
 
 "Well then," said Smith, "why not tell him 
 you are doing business?" Why not call your- 
 self a theatrical agent. A theatrical agent 
 must have callers; no callers, no business; no 
 business, no rent." 
 
 "A theatrical agent!" Happy thought, and 
 I decided to be one, or at all events to call 
 myself one. 
 
 "And." said Smith, "If I meet any of our 
 old friends dramatically disposed I will send 
 them up. I will tell them you are a theatrical 
 agent." 
 
 "Do it," said I. "I'm sick of idleness; we 
 will put up a sign. What will a little tin one 
 cost?" 
 
 "Fifty cents or a dollar, and I know a sign
 
 69 
 
 painter who will trust us," said Smith. "You 
 know the fellow who made your large real 
 estate sign. He got his money two hundred 
 dollars and I told you at the time it was ex- 
 tortion; but you handed over a check without 
 a word, and I rather guess that fellow would 
 be only too pleased to paint any sign you might 
 order." 
 
 The next day a tin sign was tacked on the 
 jamb of my door in such a manner as to pro- 
 ject into the hall. It was not pretentious 
 simply, "J. Flagg, Theatrical Agent" but it 
 was hardly up before the landlord 'came up. 
 Anyone with half an eye could see he was 
 agitated, and to aggravate matters just at this 
 crucial moment Smith was coming down the 
 hall followed by three young women all crazy 
 to go on the stage. Some think a person must 
 be crazy to want to go on the stage. 
 
 As Smith and his clients took possession of 
 my office, the landlord out of deference to 
 them requested me to step into the hall and 
 forthwith proceeded to lay down the law. 
 
 "A theatrical agent! I wouldn't have one 
 in my building not at double the rent. I 
 didn't know you were one." And I could 
 not tell him I did not know it myself. There 
 was the sign and there were the would-be 
 chorus girls; but I assured him my business 
 was limited, and this produced a soothing 
 effect on his nerves. I spoke the truth, my 
 business was limited. I had none and knew 
 no more about the theatrical business than 
 the man in the moon, and my colleague 
 Smith knew less. Therefore, had Smith not 
 been a truly remarkable borrower as well as a 
 wonderful financier, it is doubtful if the rent 
 would ever have been paid; but as it was we 
 managed to "hang on" after a fashion while 
 three months were rolling by.
 
 70 
 
 One day, when entering the building, I met 
 our landlord going out. "How's business" 
 he asked. It was quiet, and he remarked en- 
 couragingly, '*y ur season will soon be opening; 
 Spring is coming and managers will then be 
 engaging people for their Fall productions." 
 
 I acquiesced, although this was news to me, 
 and I imparted the information to Smith. "If," 
 said I, "the season is about to open and if I 
 am a theatrical agent, why not be one?" You 
 never get anywhere if you do not start, and I 
 sent Srriith out to discover how the business 
 was conducted. He reported that it was 
 a knotty proposition. The theatrical agents 
 were organized; it took money to join their 
 union. Most of them were personally ac- 
 quainted with the managers. When an agent 
 procured "talent" he exacted a commission. 
 The custom was for the manager to deduct 
 this from the actor's salary and remit to the 
 agent. Certain managers were friendly with 
 certain agents; they were clannish and an out- 
 sider would stand a poor chance of "butting 
 in." 
 
 Nevertheless, I decided to "butt," and in- 
 serted an advertisement which read a 
 follows: "Attractive young women wanted for 
 light opera chorus," etc. 
 
 The first few callers were not sufficiently 
 attractive for stage work, but the third brought 
 a living picture lima Salter. It was the am- 
 bition of her life to go on the stage, she said. 
 And we said, "If we cannot put you on we 
 had better retire from business." But I cannot 
 sing," she added, and I told her, "Not to let 
 a little thing like that worry her. If the 
 manager to whom I propose sending you 
 knows his business he will engage you." This 
 was said with the assurance of one who does 
 not know what he is talking about. Yet I had
 
 71 
 
 an idea that theatrical managers \vcre often 
 brought in touch with the human side of life 
 and must therefore be human. I felt that 
 anyone of them would extend a helping hand 
 to this seventeen-year-old girl who was 
 "striking out" in the world for herself, and 
 who was my first real stage applicant; that is, 
 the first I accepted. 
 
 In those days I was not only unacquainted 
 with the managers, but did not even know 
 their names. I was aware, however, that 
 there was a man named Oscar Hammerstein 
 who owned a few theatres, and without know- 
 ing how he might take it, gave Miss Salter a 
 letter of introduction in which I assured him 
 that any attention shown the young woman 
 would be appreciated by me. "You tell him 
 Mr. Flagg sent you up," I said; "give him this 
 letter and then come back and report." 
 
 Both Smith and myself were curious to 
 know the outcome, and we waited and waited, 
 the hours rolled by, but the young woman did 
 not return. It was eleven A. M. when she 
 left our office. Smith had been out and re- 
 turned and advised me to "forget it." "We 
 shall never see her again," he said. But just 
 then we heard short quick foot-steps coming 
 down the hall and the next moment she burst 
 into our office like a ray of sunshine, with face 
 all aglow and eyes sparkling. Before we 
 could offer her a chair she had dropped into 
 one. "I am engaged," she exclaimed, "en- 
 gaged! oh! I cannot believe it it seems like 
 a dream; but here is the contract forty weeks 
 all costumes furnished nothing to buy. 
 Oh! I'm so happy; this is the happiest day of 
 my life." And then her eyes became moist, 
 she smiled, she laughed, she put her handker- 
 chief to her eyes, she struggled to keep the 
 tears back, but there was no stopping them, and
 
 72 
 
 she cried for joy. This joy was so infectious 
 that even Smith felt constrained to blow his 
 nose. "Calm yourself, my child; wipe your 
 eyes and tell us all about it," I said. "In the 
 first place, what detained you so long?" 
 know I promised to come straight back, but I 
 had to go home I could not help it I could 
 not wait, I wanted to tell Mother." 
 
 "Is your father living?" I asked. 
 
 "No." 
 
 "Have you any brothers?" 
 
 "A little one." 
 
 "And you live with your mother and little 
 brother?" 
 
 "Yes," she said, "and eighteen dollars a 
 week! Look! There it is typewritten in the 
 agreement; that is to be my salary eighteen 
 dollars! And it means so much, so much to 
 us;" and again the tears commenced to "well 
 up" in her beautiful but inflamed eyes. 
 
 No man likes to see a woman cry so without 
 intending to be harsh I commanded her to 
 stop, and to "get down to business" and tell 
 us how she did it. 
 
 "You did it," she said, "you gave me the 
 letter it was owing to your influence with 
 Mr. Hammerstein that I was accepted." 
 
 Smith looked at me I looked at Smith, 
 neither smiled. "Well now tell us. You first 
 went to the stage door of the Victoria 
 Theatre?" 
 
 "Yes." 
 
 "And told the door-keeper you wished to 
 see Mr. Hammerstein?" 
 
 "Yes, that I had a letter and the man asked 
 me where I got it. I told him it was a letter 
 of introduction to Mr. Hammerstein signed by 
 Mr. Flagg, the Theatrical Agent." 
 
 "But that man does not know me."
 
 73 
 
 "He seemed to; soon as I mentioned your 
 name he said that was all right." 
 
 "And you went in?" 
 
 "Yes, the doorkeeper pointed to a man and 
 told me to go over and give him the letter 
 that he was Mr. Hammerstein. It was so dark I 
 could hardly see coming in from the sunlight 
 but I walked over and saw a man in his shirt 
 sleeves at work cutting a hole in the stage. 
 I supposed he was some carpenter and asked 
 if he could tell me where I could find Mr. 
 Hammerstein. He said I was talking to him. 
 
 "I thought it strange that Mr. Hammerstein 
 should be in his shirt sleeves so asked him if he 
 was Mr. Oscar Hammerstein. He said he was 
 sorry to say that that was his name, and he 
 kept right on working. I waited until he had 
 finished sawing a board and then when he 
 looked up I gave him your letter." 
 
 "Did he read it?" 
 
 "Why, of course, and told me to follow him. 
 We walked past the boxes, down into the 
 orchestra and up an aisle to his office." 
 
 "And?" 
 
 "He asked me if I had ever been on the 
 stage and I told him I never had." 
 
 "What!" ejaculated Smith "you said 
 that?" 
 
 "Had Miss lima attempted to mislead him" 
 I said, "he would have detected it in a minute. 
 She was not talking to a "boob." He would 
 have wanted to know when, where, and with 
 whom." 
 
 "He inquired if I could sing; and I said, 
 *No;' then he asked if I could dance and I 
 said, "No." 
 
 "Oh me I oh my I" said Smith. 
 
 "And what then?" I asked. 
 
 "Then he gave me a letter and told me if I 
 did not procure an engagement to drop in and
 
 74 
 
 see him next week. The letter was addressed 
 to Mr. Witmark." 
 
 "Witmark! What Witmark?" 
 
 ''The Witmark Musical Library an Agency-" 
 
 "What did Mr. Witmark say?" 
 
 "He asked if I could sing, and I told him I 
 could not." Then Miss lima proceeded to 
 tell how Mr. Witmark had given her a card to 
 Mr. Ashland. 
 
 "Ashland! What Ashland?" 
 
 "Mr. Wilfred Ashland manager of the 
 Witmark Agency." 
 
 "And what did he have to say?" 
 
 "He wanted to know if I was an alto, a 
 contralto or a soprano, and I told him I wasn't 
 anything." 
 
 "And then what?" 
 
 "Then he thought I might answer the pur- 
 pose and gave me a letter to Mr. Aborn." 
 
 "Aborn! What Aborn?" 
 
 "The Aborn Opera Company." 
 
 "And what did he want?" 
 
 "He wanted to know what I could do." 
 
 "And when you told him you couldn't do 
 anything?" 
 
 "He signed the contract there is his name 
 and Wednesday I am to begin rehearsing at 
 the Herald Square Theatre. Isn't it grand? 
 Just think of it! I can hardly wait for the day 
 to come. How shall I ever repay you for 
 your kindness? To-morrow Mother is coming 
 down to see you to thank you to arrange 
 matters to pay you." 
 
 "Do not talk about pay; we are indebted 
 to you; you have taught us more about the 
 business than we ever knew before," I said. 
 
 "Yes damn the pay," said Smith. "These 
 names are worth money to us. We should 
 pay you, not you us;" and then, apprehensive 
 lest I should think him too liberal, without
 
 75 
 
 making it clear to lima he gave me to under- 
 stand he had, when out earlier in the after- 
 noon, effected an extension of credit with the 
 groceryman, and we were now on "easy 
 street" for at least two days to come. 
 
 lima Salter was the first person ever placed 
 by me, directly or indirectly, on the stage; and 
 as I look now at her picture, which she signed 
 and gave to me with her best wishes years ago, 
 it takes me back to the old tin sign, the little 
 old dingy office looking out on the airshaft, and 
 the loaf of bread. 
 
 This was one case: I could cite hundreds 
 yes, thousands some less, some more path- 
 etic; I could fill volumes, I could write of 
 successes and of failures, of hopes blasted and 
 of hopes realized; I could mention names now 
 known on both sides of the water, which were 
 unheard of when first entered on my books. 
 I have placed young women and young men on 
 the stage who have raised themselves and those 
 dear to them from want to affluence; but 
 these were the exceptions; the majority only 
 made a living, yet were none the, less grateful; 
 and I can show many letters, sincere letters of 
 heartfelt gratitude, which any man might feel 
 proud to own. Therefore, if you believe 
 happiness consists in making others happy, you 
 can understand how happy I was during the 
 years in which I was engaged in the theatrical 
 agency business. They were the six happiest 
 years of my life.
 
 76 
 
 CHAPTER IV 
 
 The next day Mrs. Salter called to adjust 
 what she believed was her indebtedness to me. 
 I explained it was Mr. Witmark who had pro- 
 cured the engagment and that he would ex- 
 pect the commission. Although Mrs. Salter 
 agreed that this was proper, she thought I also 
 should be compensated as it was due to my 
 personal influence with Mr. Hammerstein that 
 lima had met with success. "He was so very 
 considerate to my daughter after reading your 
 note of introduction," she said. But I ex- 
 plained that Mr. Hammerstein did not know 
 me; furthermore, I did not know Mr. Witmark, 
 Mr. Ashland, or Mr. Aborn; never had heard 
 of them until Miss lima enlightened me. 
 
 This surprised her but nevertheless she was 
 insistent and left a five-dollar bill on my desk. 
 The audacity of desperation had brought us 
 success, and both Smith and myself were now 
 sure there was money in the business. Three 
 months later we were not so sanguine. The 
 busy season had opened and closed and our 
 gross receipts amounted to fifteen dollars. 
 
 This was "poor picking;" we both looked 
 seedy; it seemed a forlorn hope; seemed as 
 if we could not hold out another day and yet 
 we struggled on. I kept working and Smith 
 kept borrowing. After six months of this 
 "hand-to-mouth" living we decided to drop 
 the price from five to two dollars, and our 
 receipts quadrupled. This was not saying 
 much, but it enabled us to come a little nearer 
 to making ends meet.
 
 77 
 
 Occasionally some tragedian out of a job 
 would drop in and quote Shakespeare to us, 
 and owing to our forbearance, our ability to 
 listen, also to the fact that we invariably ex- 
 pressed admiration, we became more or less 
 popular with them and they did us many a 
 good turn. Not that we could borrow from 
 them we did not make the attempt. It is 
 well known in the profession that "tragedians 
 seldom eat." But through them we learned 
 that the Witmarks were one of the most re- 
 liable agencies in New York, and that Mr. 
 Ashland of this agency through whom we were 
 now transacting business was universally liked. 
 Nothing ruffled him, not even an impossible 
 voice. 
 
 "Why do you not go up and pay your 
 respects to Mr. Ashland?" Smith would say 
 to me. And I would say "What's the use? 
 He is placing eight out of every ten we send 
 up; why not let well enough alone?" And so 
 the months rolled by until a new Spring season 
 opened. Then business "picked up" and we 
 spruced up; we even went so far as to inquire 
 the cost of having a telephone installed in our 
 office. 
 
 Just about this time Mr. Ashland wrote a 
 letter requesting us not to send applicants after 
 four P. M., as after that hour he attended to 
 his correspondence. This letter proved valu- 
 able; it was prima facie evidence that we had 
 a connection with a real theatrical firm. It 
 was typewritten on a Witmark Musical Library 
 and Agency letterhead, and to preserve it I 
 had it framed. 
 
 We could now say to a prospective client, 
 "Pay us our fee, and if you are not satisfied 
 with the position come back and we will re- 
 fund the two dollars." "But," we would add, 
 "there is not much likelihood of this as you
 
 78 
 
 can see we are transacting business with the 
 leading theatrical agency of the city." Then 
 the framed letter would be shown to the appli- 
 cant. It worked wonders; it was a turning 
 point in our business this Ashland letter 
 and one week after receiving it I signed a 
 contract with the telephone trust. 
 
 It was a great day for us, the day the tele- 
 phone was installed. Not that we at this 
 time had any special use for the thing, but 
 others found it a convenience. There are 
 many telephone beggars in the world. 
 
 Three years passed and although Mr. Ash- 
 land and I had never met, he knew my voice 
 and I knew his over the telephone. We had 
 gradually without contemplating it drifted into 
 one of those mutually advantageous arrange- 
 ments which often prove more lasting and 
 profitable than a "cast-iron" contract. 
 
 One day Mr. Palmer of the Tarns Agency 
 called to say he could place young women 
 with good voices. This was a new connec- 
 tion. A tragedian a friend of ours had in- 
 formed him that when it came to chorus 
 singers we were headquarters. Then other 
 agents called and a still greater outlet opened 
 to us. To meet this demand I increased my 
 advertisements. Finally, as it became "noised 
 about" that we could supply the demand, we 
 found ourselves doing business with all the 
 members of the theatrical agents' union. 
 
 And so our business prospered. Many an 
 air castle eventually has been erected on solid 
 ground, and we had come up on a solid 
 foundation. Our business had made its own 
 capital, and instead of boards, at the ex- 
 piration of the first year, we found ourselves 
 walking on ingrain carpet. At the end of the 
 second, tapestry Brussels; at the end of the 
 third, Wilton velvet; and at the end of the
 
 79 
 
 fourth year the trouble commenced. 
 
 Up to this time our business had been con- 
 fined to the agents. We had not dealt with, 
 and were not known to, the theatrical 
 managers. When an agent received an order 
 from a manager for chorus singers he would 
 simply order us to send them to his office. 
 
 It was true applicants were obliged to pay, 
 in addition to the agent's, our two dollar fee. 
 But as we kept in touch with every agent in 
 the city, we knew when and where to send 
 clients, and could not only save them time but 
 a vast amount of tramping about. 
 
 The agents were not averse to receiving 
 credit for being able to fill any order without 
 delay, but it was my advertisements which 
 brought the people to me thus enabling me to 
 execute the orders I received from agents, and 
 in turn enabling them to execute orders they 
 received from managers. So long as this 
 state of affairs continued the agents were my 
 friends. They were making money, my clients 
 were paying them ten dollars while they paid 
 me two, and yet half of my receipts were 
 going back into the newspapers whereas the 
 agents were not obliged to expend one dollar 
 in advertising. Furthermore, the agents de- 
 manded an additional fee for each engagement 
 procured, but I only exacted one two-dollar 
 registration fee per year. For this, I obligated 
 myself to procure any number of stage en- 
 gagments a client might desire. 
 
 This charge was so moderate that without 
 solicitation the majority of my clients returned 
 year after year. It was owing to these renew- 
 als that I could see a prosperous future, even 
 if the agents did regard me as a convenience. 
 It was because they regarded me a valuable 
 asset that they kept my name under cover and 
 so kept the managers from discovering the
 
 80 
 
 true source from which the supply came. But, 
 the young women (my clients) finally "let the 
 cat out of the bag," and then, as stated, at the 
 end of the fourth year the trouble commenced. 
 
 It happened this way: Before a show open- 
 ed the agents through whom the performers 
 were engaged were permitted to attend the 
 final dress rehearsal, and at its completion the 
 chorus was lined up on the stage and the 
 manager and agents went down the line and 
 checked off the names. This was done to 
 avoid errors in remitting commissions. If an 
 agent claimed he had procured the engage- 
 ment for a certain person and that person dis- 
 puted the claim the matter was adjusted. But 
 if no dispute arose the person engaged signed 
 an order authorizing the manager to deduct 
 half of the second week's salary and remit 
 same to the agent entitled to receive it. 
 
 To go down the line of a large chorus and 
 identify the right one, or the right dozen, is no 
 easy task. A brunette on the street might be 
 a henna beauty on the stage; a chestnut brown 
 might be a chemical blonde. However, de- 
 spite the makeup, were all the young women 
 truthful it would not be so difficult to identify 
 them. But some women are given to ex- 
 aggeration (except when talking of their own 
 age) and some of these chorus girls would give 
 the agent one name and another to the mana- 
 ger and at the last moment "spring" still 
 another on both by exchanging names with 
 each other; anything, in fact, to mix matters 
 and "do" the agent out of his commissions. 
 
 It was during these "lineups' at the begin- 
 ning of the Fall season, after I had been in 
 business four years, that my name was sud- 
 denly brought to the attention of the leading 
 managers of New York City. I would receive 
 an order from an agent; I might be talking at
 
 81 
 
 the time in my private office to a young 
 woman; forty or fifty might be in an outer 
 office. I would send the young woman to the 
 agent and request the office boy to pass in the 
 others one at a time, intending to send each 
 one to the agent, but he the boy would in- 
 form me they had all left, just gone, gone with 
 the young woman I had sent to the agent. 
 But they had no intention of calling on the 
 agent. Oh, no! They were going to call on 
 the manager and so evade paying the agent. 
 One was enough to pay, and after she had 
 called on the agent and ascertained when and 
 where to go she would post the others. In this 
 unfair way the agent instead of making many 
 commissions would make only one. 
 
 It was a "mean trick" and I tried in every 
 way to prevent it but was outwitted at every 
 turn. There might be two or three young 
 women in my office when an order came in 
 and I would send them up, and thirty minutes 
 later the agent would "phone" that only one 
 had called, but that there was a bevy of them 
 at the theatre and that this kind of business 
 must stop. They were my clients but how 
 "tipped off;" how they reached the theatre so 
 quickly was an enigma. Still I could not make 
 the agent believe this. Seemingly I had not 
 acted in good faith. As a result of this un- 
 derhanded business on the part of many of 
 my clients when it came to the final "lineup," 
 roll call not merely in the theatres but in all 
 the rehearsal halls of the city I found myself 
 placed in an awkward position. 
 
 The fact that I was disgusted, not alone with 
 certain tricky clients but with young women 
 not from my office whom I did not know and 
 yet who claimed to be clients of mine, did not 
 help matters. 
 
 It did not help the agents, it simply made it
 
 82 
 
 look worse; and the agents stood by inwardly 
 berating me while they heard my name called 
 all along the line. 
 
 A manager would say to Miss "Which 
 
 agent sent you to us? 
 
 "Mr. Flagg." 
 
 "Flagg? We do not know him; never heard 
 of any such agent." 
 
 "Well, he is my agent and he sent me." 
 
 "And you?" 
 
 "Mr. Flagg." 
 
 "What!"' 
 
 "Yes. He's my agent also." 
 
 "And you?" 
 
 "Mr. Flagg." 
 
 "How is it with you?" 
 
 "Mr. Flagg." 
 
 "And is Flagg your agent too?" 
 
 "Yes, sir." 
 
 "And yours?" 
 
 "Yes, sir." 
 
 "Well, who the blankety blank blank is 
 Flagg, anyway? We gave him no order and 
 will pay him no commission." 
 
 "Mr. Flagg asks no commission from you." 
 
 "What!"' 
 
 "He only charges two dollars a year; we 
 have paid him; and can have all the stage 
 engagements we want." 
 
 This was news to the managers and they 
 commenced to have visions; commenced to put 
 two and two together; to realize that for some 
 time they had been employing my people al- 
 though engaging them through the agents. It 
 was now clear, they could see it all; and hence- 
 forth would deal with me direct, they would 
 cut out the middleman the agent. 
 
 Subsequently every grand and light opera 
 manager in the City did business with me. 
 This is a sweeping assertion; yet I bar none.
 
 83 
 
 Therefore, it can be seen that I had uninten- 
 tionally curtailed the income the agents had 
 formerly received. 
 
 I had no patent on my way of doing busi- 
 ness. Any person could have adopted the 
 same method, only it might have proved a 
 trifle discouraging at the beginning as it had to 
 me. Perhaps more so, as he would have to 
 compete with me; whereas, I had had no com- 
 petitor. I did not try to compete with the 
 agents. I simply created a business along 
 lines offering the least resistance and called my 
 establishment a theatrical bureau of inform- 
 ation. There never had been such a bureau 
 and there may never be another. 
 
 When the agents became apprehensive as to 
 what might happen to them they set about to 
 rectify what they were pleased to term an evil. 
 First they called a meeting; a committee was 
 appointed to call on me, to induce me to join 
 their Union. These men placed the matter 
 before me in every light. They were court- 
 eous, but cross-questioned me and ascertained 
 that my advertising bills averaged over two 
 hundred dollars a week; and that my net pro- 
 fits compared with the magnitude of my busi- 
 ness were trivial. They asked if it was my 
 desire to play the "dog in the manger," and 
 other questions disagreeable to answer. 
 
 That evening at dinner I talked the matter 
 over with Smith, and we felt there was a storm 
 brewing. We could feel it in the air. "If we 
 do not tie up with the agents there is going to 
 be trouble." "And if we do, what then?" 
 inquired Smith. "We will be doomed," said 
 I. "The day we join their Union and change 
 our method of doing business we shall have no 
 business. But if we continue on the lines we 
 have adopted we shall soon have it all; We 
 are the fashion; they are coming our way; but
 
 84 
 
 if we charge as much as the others, they will 
 go the other way." 
 
 Smith agreed, and the next day I sent a 
 letter to the agents declining the honor con- 
 ferred by asking me to join their Mutual Pro- 
 tective Association. 
 
 A few weeks later ugly rumors floated 
 through the air. My friends heard "things." 
 But the "things" they heard and the "things" 
 I heard the others (those who spread the re- 
 ports) had heard from others who also claimed 
 to have heard. It was all hearsay, and it 
 seemed as if I never should discover the orig- 
 inators. But these things all "come out in the 
 wash." It is only necessary to wait, and some 
 time, someone will say something, and you 
 will know it all. I remained calm and waited 
 almost three years, and now know it all the 
 guilty and the innocent. 
 
 To display enterprise is commendable, but 
 to adopt sneaking methods to "down" a com- 
 petitor is contemptible. A man who will re- 
 sort to an anonymous communication to kill 
 the reputation of another is an assassin he 
 stabs a man in the back. 
 
 By attending to my own affairs I had built 
 up a business that threatened the very,,^sist- 
 ence of certain agents. At least they believed 
 such to be the case, but this did not justify 
 them in circulating dastardly lies about me. It 
 seems unbelievable that men however exasper- 
 ated could resort to the despicable acts per- 
 petrated upon me. In one day thirty anony- 
 mous letters were sent to editors of news- 
 papers. They were written with a view of 
 cutting off my source of supply by having my 
 advertisements stopped. If rejected I could 
 not advertise for stage applicants; and my ad- 
 vertisements owing to these letters teeming 
 with false statements were rejected.
 
 : 
 
 85 
 
 But letter writing is a game two can play, 
 and I decided to send a little missive to the 
 editors who had received the anonymous 
 communications. A copy of my letter follows: 
 
 New York, 1905 
 Business Manager: 
 
 Dear Sir If the circulation of your paper 
 were doubtful I would not trouble to write 
 this letter; but I know from experience it ia 
 a valuable advertising medium important to 
 the welfare of my business, and 1 trust, there- 
 fore, you will give this letter consideration. 
 
 For a long time I have advertised in your 
 paper, but a few months ago was warned 
 by certain persons (if you wish, will send 
 you their names and addresses) that my 
 advertisements would be rejected by you, 
 also by other editors. This warning proved 
 true, still I believe when you are acquainted 
 with the facts I shall be reinstated. They 
 are as follows: September 9th, 1904, I re- 
 ceived a letter from the Theatrical Agents* 
 Protective Association of New York City 
 requesting me to be present at a meeting 
 to be held in the Gilsey House the following 
 Tuesday. I paid no attention to this in- 
 vitation, and a few days later received an- 
 other communication, of which the following 
 is a copy: 
 
 THE CO-OPERATIVE MUTUAL THEATRI- 
 CAL PROTECTIVE ASSOCIATION 
 
 Jas. J. Armstrong, Pros. Wm. Morris, Treas. 
 10 Union Square 43 W. 28th St. 
 
 Arthur W. Tarns, Secy., 109 West 28th St. 
 New York, Sept. 17, 1904. 
 Jared Flagg, Esq. 
 
 Dear Sir A meeting of the members of 
 the Theatrical Protective Association will be 
 held in Elks Hall, Majestic Theatre Building, 
 59th Street, next Tuesday evening, 8 o'clock. 
 We would be pleased to have you present 
 and receive the benefit of your counsel. 
 Youra truly, 
 
 Arthur W. Tarns, Secy. 
 
 I thanked them for their courtesy, but did 
 not attend.
 
 86 
 
 The same month, September 28th, Hein- 
 rich Conreid notified me by letter he would 
 try voices and hear my clients sing at 3 P. M. 
 the following Wednesday in the Metropolitan 
 Opera House. 
 
 To prove this, I can show Mr. Conreid's 
 letter. To prove I was unable to fill the 
 order I can produce fifty witnesses young 
 women who were "afraid to risk it." "Risk 
 what?" I asked. "Being arrested," they 
 said. "For what?" said I. "For being your 
 clients," I was told. And then I discovered 
 my clients were being summoned to appear 
 before the District Attorney. Two had been 
 taken from the New York Theatre, three 
 from their homes in Brooklyn, two from in 
 front of my office, etc. Some person or 
 persons (probably under the impression it 
 was a duty they owed to themselves (not to 
 me) had informed the District Attorney that 
 I was sending people to improper persons. 
 But the District Attorney (in justice to me) 
 before taking action appointed Assistant 
 District Attorney C. W. Appleton to in- 
 vestigate. I also did a little investigating, 
 and, although my clients had been warned 
 by Mr. Appleton not to talk, women will 
 talk and 1 ascertained who were the in- 
 stigators. 
 
 I employed detectives; we examined wit- 
 nesses; and one member after another of the 
 Theatrical Agents' Association became im- 
 plicated. Depositions to prove this are now 
 in the hands of my attorneys, Caruth, 
 Ziegler & Caruth. Having accumulated this 
 evidence I called on the District Attorney 
 and as soon as the facts were placed before 
 him he accorded me protection. This I can 
 prove by a letter dated October 7, 1904, ad- 
 dressed to me and signed personally by 
 William Travers Jerome. I can also prove 
 it by his acts, which speak louder than words. 
 Months have elapsed and the fact that he 
 has acted towards me as he would to any 
 reputable citizen is evidence he had no 
 occasion to act otherwise. 
 
 The President of this Protective Associa- 
 tion and certain of its members failing there- 
 fore in their attempt to inveigle the District 
 Attorney into "co-operating" with them and
 
 87 
 
 utilizing his office for their benefit and my 
 injury concocted another scheme, namely; to 
 cut off my source of supply and at their 
 subsequent meetings boasted that they would 
 put me out of business by having my ad- 
 vertisements stopped. Four witnesses, mem- 
 bers of reputable theatrical firms, admit 
 these threats were made and will so testify. 
 
 To stop my legitimate advertisements, 
 illegitimate complaints were sent out, and as 
 a result many advertisements, including those 
 which were to have appeared in your paper 
 have been sent back marked "declined." 
 These and the officially dated envelopes in 
 which they were returned I have and can 
 place in evidence to prove that thirty com- 
 plaints were made in five different states at 
 the same time New York, New Jersey, 
 Pennsylvania, Connecticut and Massachusetts. 
 
 Why these preconcerted complaints? Why 
 are certain members of the Agents' Protect- 
 ive Association so anxious to end my career 
 as a theatrical agent? Are they impelled 
 by a desire to do good? Are they actuated 
 by high principles or high commissions? 
 
 The regulation commission is one-half the 
 second week's salary. My charges are less, 
 but at times, if I have no orders, I recom- 
 mend to my clients agents who have orders. 
 A few years ago I was obliged to send them 
 all to agents for the reason that no manager 
 favored me with an order. Did the agents 
 complain then? Did they question my 
 morality then? 
 
 There is not a theatrical agent in this 
 city who has not placed clients of mine on 
 the stage. The very men now denouncing 
 me have made commissions they could not 
 have made without me. If any member of 
 their Union doubts this statement I can re- 
 fresh his memory by submitting a list of my 
 clients he has placed. 
 
 Their Secretary alone ha* procured en- 
 gagements for over eighteen hundred. All 
 its members are not against me, and nothing 
 herein stated is intended to reflect on Mr. 
 F. C. Palmer of the Tarns Agency who has 
 invariably treated me and my clients with 
 respect. The same is true of Mr. W. Ash- 
 land of the Witmark Agency. This firm has
 
 88 
 
 secured stage engagements for more than 
 three thousand five hundred of my clients, 
 and the many courtesies extended by the 
 Witmarks have been appreciated by my 
 clients and by me. We are also indebted to 
 Walter J. Plimmer, Frank Melville, Matt 
 Grau, Frank Forrester and others who have 
 not and would not stoop to underhand com- 
 petition. 
 
 It took time but when it dawned on the 
 theatrical managers that they were -mploy- 
 ing my people, although engaging them in- 
 directly, I commenced to receive orders 
 direct. Klaw & Erlanger, Frohman, Conried, 
 Savage, Belasco, Shubert, Hammerstein, 
 Thompson, Dundy, Brady, Aborn, Fisher, 
 Ryley, Harris, Hyde, Behman, Hill, Brad- 
 hurst, Currie, Ade, Ziegfeld, Liebler, Keith, 
 Proctor, Field, Lederer, Whitney and Frank 
 L. Perley not only have but are at the 
 present time employing clients of mine. I 
 can produce books, letters, contracts and 
 witnesses to prove this statement. 
 
 The person does not live who can name 
 a first-class light opera company in the 
 United States (and this means from the 
 Atlantic to the Pacific) in which my clients 
 do not at the present time take part. I 
 mention these facts to show that if some 
 of the agents do not approve of my modern 
 methods of doing business the members of 
 the Profession seem to think pretty well of 
 my work as an agent. 
 
 For procuring an engagement and keeping 
 a client at work one entire year I charge 
 two dollars. All told I have over seven 
 thousand yearly clients, and this low com- 
 mission is pleasing to them, agreeable to the 
 managers and satisfactory to me. But the 
 agents object. They want protection. They 
 have organized a society (eighty-eight in 
 number) for mutual protection and they want 
 it. They want you and every editor to 
 "co-operate" and aid them in protecting 
 themselves against my competition. Pre- 
 viously, that is, before I did business with 
 the foremost managers in the theatrical 
 world it was all right but now it is all wrong 
 they say for you to permit my ad- 
 vertisements to appear. If you continue to
 
 89 
 
 do so the members of the Profession will 
 continue to patronize me and in the estima- 
 tion of many members of the Agents' Pro- 
 tective Association this is cruel to them. 
 
 The agents do not support the members 
 of the Profession, the Profession supports 
 the agents; and if the agents are to be 
 deprived from making the high commission 
 which according to the by-laws of their own 
 society they are entitled to make who is 
 going to support them? This is the problem 
 and special meetings have been called to 
 solve it. They have even invited me to give 
 them the benefit of my counsel as per the 
 copy of their letter hereinbefore referred to. 
 
 But I maintain that the young jwomen need 
 the money. Those who do not agree with 
 me and who do not know me personally 
 and who are not acquainted with the facts 
 and who do not wish to be acquainted with 
 them say my one aim in life is to decoy 
 stage-struck girls and defraud them. The 
 charge is almost too absurd to notice. 
 Section 5, Chapter 432 of the Laws of 1904 
 reads in part "in case the applicant shall 
 not accept or obtain employment through 
 such agency then such licensed person shall 
 on demand repay the full amount of said 
 fee." Has the law left any loop-hole here 
 to swindle the unwary? And if it had, 
 would I, for the sake of a two-dollar fee, 
 place in jeopardy a one thousand dollar 
 bond, which I have, in conformity with the 
 license law, deposited with the City of New 
 York? But bond or no bond would I ruin 
 a paying business established by honest 
 dealing and five years of hard work by now 
 conducting it dishonestly? 
 
 Some of these agents, who attribute the 
 falling off in their business to me, pretend 
 that their finer sensibilities have been shock- 
 ed because my clients pose. Owing to their 
 influence a great hue and cry has been 
 raised in the theatrical papers. And yet I 
 have never exacted or accepted a fee from 
 a stage applicant for securing posing engage- 
 ments. Nor have I ever accepted one dollar 
 from any firm or person who has given a 
 client of mine a stage or a posing engage- 
 ment. This fact I emphasize because reports
 
 90 
 
 by my competitors are being circulated to the 
 effect that I receive the largest kind of fees; 
 that my two dollar yearly fee is a mere sub- 
 terfuge; and it would be impossible for me to 
 meet over-head expenses on so insignificant 
 an amount. These aspersions are made to 
 create the impression that I must from the 
 necessity of the case be in league with dis- 
 reputable resorts of one kind or another. 
 But there is not a word of truth in the 
 malicious reports. It's all one damnable lie. 
 
 That my clients have earned money by 
 posing I admit. There is not a periodical or 
 pictorial or fashion magazine issued by a 
 daily or Sunday or evening paper in which 
 pictures of my clients have not appeared. 
 
 If all the papers were to reject my ad- 
 vertisements how would I fill your orders? 
 If you wish I will send you a list of my young 
 women clients who have posed for your 
 fashion-plate artists and commercial photog- 
 raphers. 
 
 Among the illustrators, Charles Dana Gib- 
 son and Howard Chandler Christy are my 
 largest customers. Among the commercial 
 photographers, Eddowes Brothers, L. S. 
 White, Sarony, the Tennele Company, the 
 Fashion Camera Company, the Dry Goods 
 Economist, Butterick's and the Illustrated 
 Milliner are my largest customers. 
 
 To rebut the testimony of slanderers, I can 
 refer not only to these and others but to an 
 army of clients ready to testify that they 
 have never seen a thing done, heard a word 
 spoken or a question asked in my office 
 which would cause umbrage even to a prude. 
 
 If those who intimate my office is not 
 properly conducted dare to make known 
 their identity, I would gladly give them an 
 opportunity to prove their aspersions in a 
 court of law. But they are afraid to face 
 me. If you can show me one complaint 
 signed by a bona-fide client of mine or by 
 her parent or guardian, I will never ask you 
 to insert another advertisement for me. 
 
 The possibility of a client of mine having 
 just cause to complain is too remote to con- 
 sider. The law does not compel me after 
 accepting a fee to procure an engagement. 
 It merely compels me to refund the fee if
 
 91 
 
 I fail to procure one satisfactory to the 
 applicant. It is optional with her as to 
 whether she accepts or rejects any engage- 
 ment I may offer. I have no jurisdiction in 
 the matter. Therefore, if I comply with the 
 law, and no client of mine has ever accused 
 me of not doing so, how is it possible for 
 her to enter a just complaint against me? 
 
 Under the law I am obliged to keep a 
 register in which mu?<t be recorded the names 
 of my clients; also the names and addresses 
 of those to whom I have referred clients for 
 work. To omit to enter these names or to 
 substitute a false one constitutes as per 
 section four of the license law, a misde- 
 meanor. 
 
 This register, which is examined bi- 
 monthly by government officers, I am willing 
 to place at your disposal to prove you have 
 never received a complaint against me that 
 was not written anonymously, signed ficti- 
 tiously, or by some person purporting to 
 have transacted business with me, but whose 
 name does not appear on my books. The 
 complaints which have influenced you to 
 reject my advertisements have been made by 
 outsiders, imposters, pretenders, mischief 
 makers, whose aim it has been to inflict- 
 not to right a wrong. 
 
 Yours truly, 
 
 JARED FLAGG." 
 
 This letter covered the ground; and after 
 reading it and investigating the matter, every 
 editor of every paper who had declined my 
 advertisements accepted them. 
 
 And what did the members of the Agents' 
 Protective Association do then? Why, they 
 hired a hall the Grand Central Palace, Forty- 
 third Street and Lexington Avenue, and Janu- 
 ary 6th, 1905, invited Frederick L. C. Keating, 
 at that time License Commissioner, to come 
 and hear their grievances. Did he come? He 
 did, and what is more, made a speech. He 
 told the agents how much respect he had for 
 them and how little for the man who would 
 advertise to place women on the stage. He re-
 
 92 
 
 framed from mentioning my name, but they 
 all knew to whom he referred. The more he 
 maligned me the more applause he received, 
 and he grew eloquent. He did not advocate 
 my two dollars yearly fee, but approved of 
 the regulation fee; and hinted that they might 
 even exact from the members of the Profession 
 a commission equivalent to the entire first 
 week's salary and still be within the scope of 
 the law. 
 
 Mr. Keating was only thirty-two, and this 
 sentiment, emanating from one so young, 
 elicited prolonged applause. 
 
 After he finished his oration, they grasped 
 his hand, pressed it with fervor, and he return- 
 ed the grip, as much as to say, leave it to me. 
 They left it, and what did he do? He sent 
 an inspector Mr. G. W. Hamilton- with a 
 stenographer to my office to secure a list of 
 the names of my clients and customers. Not 
 a few but hundreds, beginning with A and not 
 stopping until they had reached Z. These 
 were his orders and Mr. Hamilton obeyed 
 orders. 
 
 And what did Mr. Keating propose to do 
 with these names? My clients would not go 
 to him, so he decided to go to them, and if 
 possible coerce them to complain. 
 
 To revoke my license without jeopardizing 
 his his license to act as License Commissioner 
 it would be necessary to produce a com- 
 plainant, preferably some person with whom 
 I had transacted business. It was for this 
 reason he wanted the list; and with the hope 
 of discovering some one willing to appear 
 against me, he detailed seven inspectors to 
 scour the city from the Battery to the Bronx. 
 But, notwithstanding that they interviewed 
 hundreds of my clients, they were unable to 
 find one who could, would or did make a
 
 93 
 
 complaint. And after wasting the city's 
 money, Keating gave it up as a bad job. 
 
 In the meantime I was doing business. The 
 more the agents kicked, the more I was black- 
 guarded, the more business I did. It is our 
 rankest enemies, not our loving friends, who 
 advertise us. Actors who previously had never 
 heard of me now called and registered. 
 Managers also called, and I was literally 
 "snowed-under" with orders. At times, there 
 was standing room only in my offices. 
 
 In addition to the main office we now had 
 five branch offices. To keep them all in 
 operation I issued, in addition to my news- 
 paper advertisements, a circular of which the 
 following is a copy: 
 
 "ADVICE TO THOSE WHO DENOUNCE THE 
 STAGE. 
 
 If a young woman is good looking she 
 knows it; she does not have to be told; and 
 if obliged to support herself why blame her for 
 going on the stage. What legitimate vocation 
 can she adopt that will pay so well or afford 
 so many opportunities for advancement? 
 
 The salaries usually paid to chorus singers 
 range from eighteen to thirty dollars a week, 
 and 'front-row' or 'show* girls frequently re- 
 ceive more. Furthermore, if a young woman 
 displays talent, there is no telling how high a 
 salary she may command. It is not, however, 
 always a case of money. The love of admir- 
 ation, the glitter, the excitement of the life and 
 possibility of ultimate fame are incentives. 
 
 If a young woman is imbued with the idea 
 that she may make the hit of her life on the 
 stage (and every great actress has been im- 
 bued with this idea) it is a waste of time to 
 try and convince her she may make the mis- 
 take of her life. 
 
 In denouncing the stage you make her more
 
 94 
 
 determined to 'go on,' or, if dutiful, more 
 miserable by remaining off. It does not cool 
 her ardor; it does not cure her. If she has the 
 'fever' nothing will cure her that is, nothing 
 but a dose of the 'real article,' and even this 
 may not prove effective because work we en- 
 joy is not drudgery; work we cannot enjoy is 
 drudgery. Stage aspirants enjoy their work; 
 love their profession; and one who loves the 
 stage as a profession can endure work, and con- 
 sequently is more likely to meet with success on 
 it than in any other calling. 
 
 If a woman has ambition, a good constitu- 
 tion, a cheerful disposition, and is not too old 
 or too young, too tall or too short, too fat or 
 too lean, there is no telling what she may ac- 
 complish behind the 'footlights.' Many of the 
 most beautiful women in the world are there 
 and they are workers and enjoy life and are 
 not depraved. A woman can be on the stage 
 and be good even if beautiful. 
 
 Although chorus singers as a whole may be 
 more daintily formed and attractive, they are 
 not morally inferior to their sisters who are 
 idling their lives away doing nothing or eking 
 out an existence in distasteful domestic or mer- 
 cantile pursuits. The good and the bad are to 
 be found among the bad and the good in all 
 walks of life; and if too much attention, too 
 many letters, too many invitations, too many 
 bouquets, and too many admirers will turn a 
 young woman's head, it indicates she has in- 
 herited a weak head from her ancestors. Is 
 this her fault? Is it the fault of the stage? 
 On the stage discipline is maintained, and if 
 she will attend to her stage duties and not 
 attend too many wine suppers, she will com- 
 mand respect. 
 
 The danger, especially if your daughter has 
 inherited any of your sporty proclivities, will
 
 9$ 
 
 occur after the show not during the perform- 
 ance. But, if only good has been be- 
 queathed inherited you can repose con- 
 fidence in your child. If trustworthy, trust 
 her. Nothing causes a young woman greater 
 anguish than to be regarded with suspicion by 
 those whom she loves. 
 
 Many parents show faith in their offspring 
 by not trusting them out of sight, and child- 
 ren usually show their appreciation of this style 
 of parental solicitude by making up for lo^t 
 time as soon as they are out of sight. Enforced 
 idleness and too much chaperoning in time 
 becomes unendurable. 
 
 If you wish your daughter to feel that life is 
 worth living you will peimit her to be engaged 
 in some pursuit which engrosses her mind. 
 You will not stifle her ambition and deprive 
 her of the satisfaction of earning for services 
 rendered an honest dollar. Money earned 
 in the Profession is honestly earned. The 
 stage to-day is not what it was years ago. An 
 ill-bred person will not be tolerated even in a 
 second-rate burlesque company. Many of the 
 most cultured young women (and with the con- 
 sent of their parents) are now adopting the 
 stage as a means of livelihood. A few years 
 ago this was not the case. I do not mean that 
 good and noble women were not to be found 
 on the stage in days gone by, but never in its 
 history were so many of this kind on it as at 
 the present time. 
 
 Those who talk the loudest about the de- 
 pravities of stage life have had no stage ex- 
 perience. They are ignorant of the facts. 
 They entertain puritanical notions regarding the 
 theatre; they are narrow-minded and afflicted 
 with false pride. Each year, however, as we 
 become more enlightened this prejudice be- 
 comes less pronounced. The stage, as well as
 
 96 
 
 the world, is advancing not deteriorating. 
 Every person cannot join the Profession. We 
 are not all sufficiently prepossessing in appear- 
 ance; nor have we all the talent to act and to 
 sing and to charm and dance and amuse and 
 interest and entertain and distract the minds 
 of others from everyday cares of life. If * 
 young woman believes she possesses this gift, 
 does it signify she contemplates disgracing her- 
 self or friends? And if she attempts to 
 develop it, should she be disinherited and 
 ostracised? 
 
 Without occupation there can be no hap- 
 piness; and life without a future is not worth 
 living. Why then blight the happiness and 
 even the lives of those who wish to be en- 
 gaged in a congenial and honorable occupation 
 and to look forward to a future?" 
 
 Anything improper about this circular? 
 
 It was when these circulars, in large quan- 
 tities, were going out and business was coming 
 in that Smith, who prided himself on never 
 having in adversity or in the joys of prosperity 
 permitted himself to become fascinated with 
 any woman, lost his heart and I lost Smith. 
 
 "Nothing is more monotonous than too great 
 a variety." These were his words after 
 his fiancee had persuaded him to eschew 
 theatricals, buy a farm, settle down and live 
 the simple life.
 
 97 
 
 CHAPTER 6. 
 
 Almost two years had elapsed since the 
 over-zealous License Commissioner, Keating, 
 had attempted to block my progress. During 
 these years I had missed my old "stand by," 
 Smith, more than a little, yet I had made 
 progress. 
 
 In the latter part of 1 905 I let it be known 
 that if any clients of mine were dismissed 
 during rehearsals without being compensated 
 for time lost I would hold the "management" 
 responsible. 
 
 It seems that for years it had been a custom 
 when rehearsing a company to hold out false 
 inducements. Day after day stage directors 
 encouraged more to rehearse than they might 
 ultimately require. No salaries were paid for 
 rehearsing, this was understood; but when a 
 young woman was induced to rehearse with the 
 tacit understanding she was to have a contract, 
 and at the last moment, owing to no fault of 
 her own, was told her services would not be 
 required, it was akin to robbery. To keep her 
 rehearsing, spending carfare and lunch money, 
 and at times even pawning jewelry to provide 
 the necessities of life as she struggled on with- 
 out pay under the mistaken impression she 
 was to be engaged, did not seem like a equa 
 deal. 
 
 The managers claimed they received no 
 benefit in rehearsing these extra girls; there- 
 fore, if dismissed, they should expect no com- 
 pensation. But I maintained this was not a 
 valid reason. If it did the managers no good
 
 98 
 
 why invariably rehearse a larger chorus th-.n 
 they contemplated employing? Was it not to 
 insure against possible financial loss by having 
 trained substitutes ready to fill vacancies which 
 were liable to occur during the formation of a 
 company? 
 
 If a manager insures his theatre against fire 
 and it proves an unnecessary precaution does 
 he derive benefit from his insurance policy? 
 Can he, under such circumstances, compel the 
 insurance company to remit the premium? 
 What right has he then, if he insures his 
 production against disaster and it proves an 
 unnecessary precaution, to compel the young 
 women to remit the premium? Why should 
 they foot his bills? It was the custom, but I 
 decided to change it; not from philanthropic 
 motives, but from selfish motives. We can 
 best help ourselves by helping others, and I 
 proposed to help my clients by rectifying the 
 imposition which had heretofore been practiced 
 upon them. With this end in view I retained 
 counsel and forthwith proceeded, according to 
 section 3221, page 924, of the Code of Civil 
 Procedure of the State of New York, to bring 
 the managers "up with a round turn." 
 
 I issued a circular authorizing clients of mine 
 dismissed in this unjust manner to report to 
 my lawyer who would prosecute their claims 
 and pay over to them the full amount recovered 
 without deducting therefrom one dollar for 
 legal fees or disbursements. Although this in- 
 creased my business it brought down on my 
 head the wrath of the managers who har' 
 formerly been friendly. Yet I was transacting 
 more business than ever. The members of the 
 Profession came in droves to commend me for 
 the stand I had taken. It is pleasant to be 
 "lauded to the skies;" we like to listen to it; 
 and to have time to listen I set aoart one after-
 
 99 
 
 noon each week and gave a "five o'clock tea/ 
 At each affair a different hostess presided, it 
 was a "crush," yet they all seemed to enjoy 
 themselves. 
 
 If we cannot get enjoyment out of our busi- 
 ness, if we are waiting for a time to come when 
 we can afford to retire and take things easy 
 before enjoying life we may die without know- 
 ing what it is to live. 
 
 The difference between living and existing is 
 vivacity; and when I think of those days, the 
 life, the sparkling wit, the fun f the pleasant 
 greetings, now only a memory, gone, never to 
 return, I wonder if I am getting out of life at 
 the present time all that there is in life. 
 
 At that time I was conceded to be the most 
 extensively advertised agent in the United 
 States. I had practically cornered the chorus 
 girl market; every one said I had them all, and 
 there was truth in it. Even the theatrical paper* 
 admitted I was master of the situation. When 
 it came to filling a large order every theatrical 
 agent was at my mercy. By raising a finger 
 I could turn the tide in his direction or in the 
 direction of some other agent or could ignore 
 them all and send my clients direct to a 
 manager. He could not give a show without 
 young women, and if he did not take them 
 from me he could go without them. The fact 
 that I would not permit a client to be dis- 
 charged during the rehearsing season without 
 compensation might make him "fume," and 
 he might for a bluff "turn down" applicants 
 coming from my office; but in the end he would 
 swallow his pride and take them. Not because 
 he wanted to, but because if he did not take 
 them from me directly he would have to take 
 them from me indirectly, through other agents, 
 as I practically controlled, as stated, almost the 
 entire chorus girl output.
 
 100 
 
 The epithets used by some of these managers 
 and agents at this time in connection with my 
 name did much to make it known, and for 
 quite a period I was the most talked about 
 person on the "Rial to." I was blamed and I 
 was praised. If I happened to drop in at one 
 of the all-night restaurants along the "Great 
 White Way," for every manager or agent, who 
 defamed me when I was not looking, a hun- 
 dred "show girls" upheld me and drank to my 
 health when I was looking. 
 
 But it was not only in New York; the newt 
 had "spread like wildfire;" and in Boston, 
 Philadelphia, Chicago, and San Francisco my 
 circulars offering to protect my clients, free of 
 cost to them, were read with avidity; read in 
 secret when in their dressing-rooms with doors 
 locked. 
 
 The mere fact that this particular circular 
 was kept away from the eyes of the managers 
 by my clients was enough to make every young 
 woman in the company want to see it and 
 want to know all about it. Men dislike details 
 but women want full particulars. What is two 
 dollars to a "front row show girl" compared 
 with rehearsing two months with the risk of 
 then being dismissed without cause and without 
 pay? It was not to be considered; and when 
 the next rehearsing season came around the 
 two dollar bills flowed into my office twice as 
 fast as they ever had before; and those who 
 paid them were protected, absolutely. We 
 did not lose a case for the obvious reason the 
 managers knew they did not have a "leg on 
 which to stand" and so settled all claims insti- 
 tuted, out of court. Some would reconsider 
 the matter when they realized what might 
 happen to them and would reinstate the chorus 
 singers who had been cast adrift at the last 
 moment.
 
 101 
 
 Thus it can be seen I was successful in recti- 
 fying this unjust custom which had existed for 
 years and which, now that I am no longer in 
 the business, again exists. 
 
 I have explained in detail why I was not 
 popular with certain agents and managers in 
 order that the reader may understand the mo- 
 tive these men (not all but several) had in com- 
 bining and in using influence, political and 
 otherwise, to have me driven from the field. 
 
 Money, the love of which is the root of 
 much evil, was the moving power. I was a 
 "thorn in the side' to the agents and an ex- 
 pense to the managers, and when you touch 
 a man's pocket you touch him in a tender spot.
 
 102 
 
 CHAPTER 7. 
 
 Nothing irritates like success. My success 
 made many theatrical agents furious. Not all, 
 however, were envious. Some over their 
 signatures assured me that they took no part 
 in the disgraceful proceedings. 
 
 The Treasurer of the Theatrical Agent's 
 Society, Webster Cullison, was unquestionably 
 irritated. 
 
 Mr. Cullison had on June 2 1 st, 1 905, written 
 me that he was in urgent need of young women 
 for chorus work. He had received orders and 
 was unable to fill them. I declined to aid him 
 because I was at the time deluged with orders 
 of my own received direct from managers. 
 After reading my letter to this effect Cullison 
 sent Philip Watkins, manager of his operatic 
 department, to my office to persuade me to 
 execute a part if not all of his order; but it 
 was against my rules to subject clients to ad- 
 ditional expense; if I could place them with 
 managers I did not propose to allow another 
 agent to make another fee out of them. But 
 if I could not "book" them and if some other 
 agent could then it became optional with my 
 clients as to whether or not they cared to pay 
 the additional fee. 
 
 Watkins explained the situation to Cullison 
 and later informed me that Cullison was in- 
 censed for the stand I had taken. Evidently 
 it rankled in his breast a long time, over eight 
 months, as on March 20, 1906, he invited his 
 brother agents whose orders I had rejected for 
 the same reason to meet him in his office Sun-
 
 103 
 
 day evening, March 25, 1906, to discuss (as 
 he put it) "that man Flagg." 
 
 In his letter asking me to help him fill orders 
 it was "My dear Mr. Flagg;" but now (as he 
 no longer could see any prospect of making 
 money out of my clients) it was "that man 
 Flagg." 
 
 About fifteen agents attended this Sunday 
 night conference and from all accounts they 
 had a lively session. The stenographer whose 
 cVity it was to record the minutes had her hands 
 full. 
 
 We wanted those minutes. By "we" I mean 
 Assistant District Attorney William Marshall 
 and myself. They might afford us a founda- 
 tion upon which to base an action of criminal 
 conspiracy. Mr. Marshall tried three different 
 times in my behalf to get them. Mr. Jerome 
 also served papers on Cullison demanding that 
 they be produced in his, the District Attorney's, 
 office, but they did not materialize. Some one, 
 who knows but won't tell, spirited them away. 
 When people simply won't talk it is difficult 
 at the time to prove conspiracy. But if a per- 
 son has patience and will "bide his time," 
 sooner or later the truth "will out." As 
 stated, I have been biding my time; and now 
 years after that rainy Sunday night, the night 
 the conspirators met in secret behind locked 
 doors in the office of Webster Cullison, No. 
 1 402 Broadway, the truth is unfolding itself 
 before me. 
 
 Cullison himself admits this secret session 
 took place on the evening of March 25, 1906 
 and that they convened for the purpose of dis- 
 cussing me. Just how they discussed me I can 
 not state literally, but judging from subsequent 
 acts it is fair to assume that the spokesman 
 spoke as follows: 
 
 Flagg is acting the part of a "dog in the
 
 104 
 
 manger." He is cutting commissions. He re- 
 fuses to recognize our Union and wants the 
 earth. Our very existence is threatened. If 
 Flagg keeps expanding we may as well close 
 up shop. As he conducts his business lawfully 
 we have no way of revoking his license, but as 
 it is about to expire by limitation the law gives 
 us the privilege to object to his procuring a 
 new one. It is now the 25th of March. Next 
 month he will put in his application for a new 
 license and we shall then have the legal right 
 to pass over that period of his life in which he 
 has been engaged in the theatrical business and 
 rake up his past. We can go away back to 
 the time of the "Flagg Flats" and show from 
 his record when engaged in the flat business 
 that he is not entitled to a license. This will 
 be easy now that we have the License Com- 
 missioner and two benevolent women's 
 leagues with us. 
 
 If it were our Society only that objected it 
 might occasion comment. People might think 
 we were interested witnesses, competitors; but 
 with the Woman's Municipal League and the 
 Woman's Rescue League as joint complainants 
 it will be different. No person will say these 
 leagues are pecuniarily interested. 
 
 Bogart, the new License Commissioner, is 
 anxious to have everything look straight and 
 you cannot blame him. He has only recently 
 been appointed and Flagg might show fight 
 might attempt to make trouble; in such an 
 event Bogart would rely not so much on us 
 as on the benevolent leagues. Our Society can 
 hardly be called religious and the Commissioner 
 knows and we know that the Mayor would not 
 be likely to extend to us much consideration. 
 But the Mayor or any other man would not 
 dare to intimate that Charlotte Smith, the 
 venerable head of the National and Inter-
 
 SS'-' 105 
 
 national Woman's Rescue League was actuated 
 by other than philanthropic motives. So with 
 the Woman's Municipal League. Look at its 
 board of directors. Those names carry weight. 
 With the co-operation of these two leagues I 
 do not hesitate to say our victory is as good as 
 won, etc., etc. 
 
 If the reader cannot understand why the 
 flat business should be connected with the 
 theatrical business let him consider the follow- 
 ing illustration: Suppose a physician had built 
 up a practice by charging a small fee; suppose 
 certain other doctors had said to him, "Here! 
 this thing must stop! if you do not charge your 
 patients as much as we charge ours we will 
 bring influence to bear and have your license 
 taken from you. Then if you persist in practi- 
 cing without a doctor's certificate we will have 
 the authorities jail you." Suppose they had 
 talked like this, and suppose he had said to 
 them: "You can't do it," and they had re- 
 plied, "Oh, yes we can and we will tell you 
 why." Years ago, long before you thought of 
 becoming an M. D. you owned many flat 
 buildings and some of your tenants on a hot 
 night in the dead of Summer went on the roof 
 and sang, 'She is the Sunshine of Paradise 
 Alley.' This disturbed the "peace of the 
 neighborhood." Think what that means. We 
 do not say you were present; we are aware you 
 were not; we know you did not live on the 
 premises and that you were in Long Branch, 
 N. J. registered at the Ocean Hotel at the 
 time; but that does not exonerate you in the 
 eyes of the law; they were your buildings and 
 your tenants and when on the stand you had 
 to admit it. Therefore you are not a fit person 
 to practice medicine, and we are sure the 
 authorities when appealed to will so decide. 
 
 Now the readers if versed in legal lore may 
 understand the connection.
 
 106 
 
 This was my case exactly; only instead of 
 being a licensed physician I was a licensed 
 agent, and the other agents were sure that I 
 was not a fit person to conduct a theatrical 
 agency because ten years previously a few of 
 my tenants had disturbed the peace of the 
 neighborhood; wherefore they appealed to the 
 authorities. 
 
 On the first day of each May a theatrical 
 agent's license expires. Then if the agent 
 wishes to continue in business he must make 
 application for a new one; and under the law, 
 as recently amended, it is left to the discretion 
 of the Commissioner as to whether or not he 
 will grant a license. Actuated by prejudice, 
 spite, animosity, political influence, a desire to 
 accommodate friends or to obey the commands 
 of a district leader, or for any other unlawful 
 cause he may say, "In my discretion I decline 
 to issue a license." And the applicant how- 
 ever worthy has no redress other than an ap- 
 peal to the Appellate Division of the Supreme 
 Court which entails expense and a delay of 
 about eighteen months. 
 
 No reason could be shown why my old 
 license should be revoked, and as a matter of 
 fact and record it was not revoked, statements 
 made by the newspapers to the contrary not- 
 withstanding. My enemies were obliged to 
 wait until it expired by limitation before ob- 
 jecting to its renewal. But when the time ar- 
 rived to apply for a new license my enemies 
 put the so-called benevolent women's leagues 
 to the front. 
 
 The fact there had been nothing in the legal 
 or moral conduct of my agency business that 
 any person could object to was not to be taken 
 into consideration. The "Honorable" John 
 N. Bogart, License Commissioner, in the ex-
 
 107 
 
 ercise of his discretion^ ruled that that had 
 nothing to do with the matter. Did my tenants 
 ten years ago disturb the peace of the neigh- 
 borhood? That was the question, and to 
 settle it he allowed the allies of the theatrical 
 agents, the so-called women's benevolent 
 leagues, to refer back to my 1896, "flat" trial, 
 and assign it as sufficient cause why I should 
 not in 1 906, ten years later, be legally permit- 
 ted to honorably compete against the agents. 
 
 The Agent's Society made no complaint 
 against me, nevertheless certain members were 
 instrumental in securing the services of Char- 
 lotte Smith of the alleged Women's Rescue 
 League and Helen Arthur of the Municipal 
 League to aid the Commissioner in "pulling the 
 chestnuts out of the fire," so to speak. 
 
 In New York City there are many societies 
 also individuals trying to make a living without 
 working; parasites who eke out an existence 
 by humbugging the people; and the meanest 
 of all are those who obtain money by begging 
 in the name of charity, who pretend to be in- 
 terested in the unfortunate, but who in reality 
 are only interested in themselves. 
 
 These imposters filch money from kind- 
 hearted persons by representing that it will be 
 used in helping the helpless, whereas the major 
 portion is used in helping themselves. To facil- 
 itate collections these beggars unite and form 
 what they call a "League" or "Society." 
 
 According to the New York American, 
 February 1st, 1915, the Charity Organization 
 Society in its last annual report admits that it 
 cost $148,308.54 to give $90,510.25 to the 
 poor. In round figures out of two hundred 
 and thirty thousand, one hundred and forty 
 thousand dollars were "knocked down." 
 
 In forming a "benevolent society" the first 
 requisite after the promoters have endowed it
 
 108 
 
 with an impressive name but no cash is to rope 
 in a few estimable women and make a dummy 
 board of directors of them. This gives prestige 
 to the organization and makes it easier for the 
 beggars to obtain money under false pretenses. 
 Reputation is more to these people than justice. 
 They are more anxious to seem, than to be, 
 saintly. They have no respect for truth, care 
 nothing for facts but are slaves to custom. 
 They subsist on public approval and the so- 
 called officers who pay to themselves salaries 
 would bill the town like a circus and blazon 
 their names far and wide if it did not cost 
 money to advertise. It is against their princi- 
 ples to pay for anything, but if they can jump 
 on any one and thereby gain free advertising 
 they will, with or without evidence, pick up 
 their skirts and jump. 
 
 The License Commissioner and a few theat- 
 rical agents realizing this and the importance 
 of having arrayed against me powerful and 
 seemingly reputable witnesses invoked the co- 
 operation of the aforementioned so-called 
 benevolent leagues. Therefore the question 
 arises were my competitors who had connived 
 with these "Leagues" and the License Com- 
 missioner guilty of criminal conspiracy. 
 
 When two or more persons combine to in- 
 jure another's reputation or business that in 
 law constitutes criminal conspiracy. 
 
 It has been ruled by a Federal Court that "a 
 conspiracy is a confederation to effect by un- 
 lawful means a legal end or by legal means 
 an illegal end. It is not necessary that two or 
 more men meet and formally enter into an 
 agreement or unlawful scheme. It is enough 
 if two or more men in any manner come to n 
 mutual understanding to accomplish an un- 
 lawful design. All parties become partners to
 
 109 
 
 a conspiracy even if the part is a subordinate 
 one. 
 
 Our statutes insist that at least one shall 
 actually perform some act to effect the object 
 of the conspiracy. The act must be an overt 
 one but not in itself a crime. 
 
 The criminal intent to commit the overt act 
 need not be shown. If the acts speak for 
 themselves you are at liberty to infer the 
 intent." 
 
 It is for the reader to determine if the acts 
 of those who did or did not appear against me 
 speak for themselves. If they do then accord- 
 ing to the Court's ruling he is "at liberty to in- 
 fer the intent." 
 
 I shall refer to the acts of each in chrono- 
 logical order. 
 
 Charlotte Smith. Who is Charlotte Smith? 
 She styles herself President of the "National 
 and International Woman's Rescue League." 
 No address. 
 
 I quote from the minutes of my third hearing 
 before the License Commissioner: 
 
 My lawyer: "Mrs. Smith, where is your 
 league located your office?" 
 
 "We have no office just now." 
 
 "Did this league of yours ever have an 
 office?" 
 
 (Witness refuses to answer). 
 
 "Is it not a fact that your Rescue League is 
 a myth?" 
 
 (Witness refuses to answer). 
 
 By Lawyer Goodhart (attorney for the al- 
 leged Woman's Rescue League) : "I object to 
 all further questions about the league. We will 
 allow it to be understood that this witness does 
 not appear here as representing any league 
 but simply as a private citizen." 
 
 My lawyer: "This woman has been repre- 
 senting to the public that she is the President
 
 no 
 
 of the Woman's Rescue League. I can prove 
 by affidavits and by the Parkhurst Society that 
 no such league exists and that this woman is 
 an imposter. I also claim the right to put 
 these questions in order to attack the credi- 
 bility of the witness and this I have a legal 
 right to do." 
 
 By the License Commissioner: "You may 
 have that right in a court of law but we do 
 things differently here. I will not allow any 
 questions regarding this league because accord- 
 ing to the statement of the attorney who repre- 
 sents this witness no such league appears here 
 or is represented before me." 
 
 So much for Charlotte Smith. 
 
 Now Helen Arthur. Who is Helen Arthur? 
 She is the legal adviser of the Woman's Muni- 
 cipal League, 1 9 West Twenty-sixth Street, 
 New York City. But with all the facilities of 
 the "Research Department" of this league at 
 her command she failed to coerce any person 
 (and she tried for weeks) to say aught against 
 me. Furthermore, although she was looking 
 for trouble she failed to discover anything out 
 of the way in the conduct of my business, my 
 customers, my young women clients or my 
 own conduct; and subsequently so stated in 
 writing and I hold the original letter which was 
 given to me after this league had, according to 
 Miss Arthur herself, employed both men and 
 women accomplices to call at my office and 
 try by lying and spying to entrap me. De- 
 spite all this Miss Arthur, to accommodate the 
 License Commissioner, although she had no 
 complaint to enter, appeared at my hearing, 
 March 28th, 1906, thereby conferring upon 
 the Commissioner the benefit of the prestige of 
 the league she represented. 
 
 Bogart evidently believed it would "clear 
 his skirts" of being in collusion with others to
 
 II I 
 
 say the Woman's Municipal League had ap- 
 peared against me, and so anxious was he to 
 be able to say this that he asked lawyer Arthur 
 (so she says) to be present with or without a 
 complaint, and to accommodate him she was on 
 hand and did the best she could. She "button- 
 holed" the reporters and intimated that "Some 
 day some day the Woman's Municipal 
 League now that I am at the head of its 'Re- 
 search Department' may have a complaint to 
 lodge against Flagg." "Some day some 
 day" Lawyer Helen Arthur may become a 
 Justice of the Supreme Court. 
 
 Later realizing the gravity of the crime she 
 had committed and having heard that the 
 District Attorney had made demand on Culli- 
 son to produce the minutes of the secret Sun- 
 day night meeting and fearing a prosecution 
 for criminal conspiracy this weak-minded law- 
 yer in petticoats retracted in writing all she had 
 said against me. So much for Helen Arthur. 
 
 Now Goodhart. Who's Lawrence G. Good- 
 hart? He says he is Austin Davis' lawyer and 
 there is no question about it. Some time prior 
 to the March 25th, 1906, Sunday night- meet- 
 ing Davis instituted a damage suit against the 
 Morning Telegraph Publishing Company, 
 Eighth Avenue and Fiftieth Street, New York 
 City, and as Goodhart's name appears on the 
 complaint as attorney of record it is proof 
 positive Goodhart is his lawyer. Please do 
 not lose sight of this fact nor of the fact that 
 Davis is a member of the Theatrical Agents' 
 Society. 
 
 Away back, years before they wanted to put 
 me out of business, Charlotte Smith introduced 
 herself to Goodhart's client, Austin Davis; and 
 ae time rolled by he became well acquainted 
 with her. By her hypocritical representations 
 he was at first led to believe she was a pious 
 woman.
 
 112 
 
 Early in September, 1905, she dropped into 
 Davis' office to have a ''heart to heart" talk 
 with him. She wanted him to supply her with 
 "talent" free in order that she might give her- 
 self a benefit; but she did not say so to Davis. 
 She told him the proceeds of the proposed 
 benefit were to go to Beitha Claiche, the "white 
 slave girl," at that time incarcerated in the 
 tombs charged with murder. 
 
 Davis, impressed by Mrs. Smith's seeming 
 good intentions agreed to help her, supposing, 
 as did the performers, that the money was to 
 go to the poor "white slave girl." But Davis 
 knows better now. 
 
 The entertainment was given in Association 
 Hall, 1 60 West Twenty-ninth Street, New York 
 City, September 28th, 1905; but Charlotte 
 Smith got away with the entire box-office re- 
 ceipts; and Bertha, for whose benefit the enter- 
 tainment was supposed to have been given, 
 did not receive a penny and wrote Davis a 
 letter from the Tombs to this effect. 
 
 Davis when told that Charlotte had skipped 
 with the box-office receipts got hot but subse- 
 quently cooled off. 
 
 In December, 1905, after the Bertha Claiche 
 affair had "blown over" the alleged president, 
 Charlotte Smith, again "turned up" at the office 
 of Austin Davis. This time she was more 
 modest in her demands. She did not mention 
 "benefit," she substituted a different word 
 "accommodate." If Davis would accommo- 
 date her by writing two letters on his theatrical 
 letterhead paper, one asking her to rescue 
 certain young women who had been enticed 
 into an immoral resort and the other, date'd 
 two weeks later, thanking her for having done 
 so; in other words, thanking her for having 
 rescued young women who did not exist, it
 
 113 
 
 would place her under obligations to him. 
 She wanted these letters for begging purposes. 
 She needed money and the letters were im- 
 portant; she could use them as evidence to 
 prove she was consecrating her life to a noble 
 cause, the rescuing of the fallen, whereas the 
 only person whom she was ever known to have 
 "rescued" was herself and she accomplished 
 this by begging from and imposing upon the 
 charitably inclined. 
 
 When "the wife" discovered that Mr. Davis 
 had signed and given this woman these two 
 letters she became excited; women do some- 
 times become excited and Mrs. Davis told me 
 herself she had no use for women of the Char- 
 lotte Smith type. But Mr. Davis explained to 
 his wife, and I was present, that Mrs. Smith was 
 a dangerous woman; she might have made 
 trouble had he refused. He gave her the 
 letters because he considered it wise not to in- 
 cur her enmity. He admitted that he would 
 like to have them back and had already con- 
 sulted his lawyer, Goodhart, about the matter. 
 
 It is important to keep in mind that all this 
 my conversation with Davis and his inter- 
 view with his legal adviser, Goodhart, relative 
 to the two begging letters took place in 1 905. 
 
 It was in this year that Davis signed the 
 spurious begging letters to accommodate Char- 
 lotte Smith; and it was the next year, 1906, 
 that Charlotte Smith signed the spurious com- 
 plaining letter to accommodate Davis. 
 
 The day after the Sunday night meeting, 
 held March 25th, 1906, in Cullison's office for 
 the purpose of discussing me, Charlotte Smith 
 called on Davis' lawyer, this self-same L. G. 
 Goodhart, 2 1 Park Row, with a letter of intro- 
 duction dated one day later, March 26th. 
 This was not disputed. 
 
 Now who sent her to Goodhart's office?
 
 114 
 
 Did someone at that secret meeting held the 
 evening before she called on Davis* lawyer 
 make a motion that she be secured to aid them 
 in depriving me of my license; and did it go 
 down on the minutes of the meeting that tnis 
 pretender was to co-operate with them in the 
 conspiracy to put me out of business? 
 
 Now, do you understand why District At- 
 torney Jerome could not lay hands on those 
 minutes? Can you imagine why they were 
 spirited away? Why every "mother's son" of 
 them in that room that night would rather have 
 been fined and sent to jail for contempt than 
 to have been "brought up" on the more serious 
 charge of conspiracy with ten or more years 
 staring him in the face? Can you blame them 
 under such circumstances for doing away with 
 such incriminating evidence, the minutes of 
 such a meeting? 
 
 Davis was a member of the Union. Good- 
 hart was his lawyer. The day after the Union 
 held its meeting Mrs. Smith was closeted with 
 Goodhart and the outcome was the following 
 letter: I quote from the minutes of my first 
 hearing. 
 
 By Commissioner Bogart: "Under date of 
 April 3, 1906, I received the following letter: 
 
 "Dear Sir My client, the Woman'* 
 Rescue League, instructs me on its behalf to 
 protest against the granting of a renewal 
 license to one Jared Flagg. And to support 
 its protest respectfully calls your attention 
 to the following facts: Mr. Flagg has been 
 advertising for girls to act as artists' models; 
 and in this connection and as bearing upon 
 Mr. Flagg's fitness to conduct such an agency 
 and for such a purpose the enclosed memo- 
 randa and letter taken from the files of the 
 Woman's Rescue League will prove interest- 
 ing. If you desire any other information 
 upon this point the officers of the League 
 stand ready to appear before you at any
 
 115 
 
 hearing you may fix. My client further in- 
 structs me to call your attention to the fact 
 reported in the newspapers that Flagg served 
 under his own name at Auburn State's 
 Prison a sentence of two years for the crime 
 of decoying girls to houses of ill-repute. Of 
 course I make these statements as attorney 
 for the League and my client stands ready 
 to back them up by ample and sufficient 
 evidence. 
 
 As I have stated, the enclosed copy of a 
 letter and explanatory note is taken from 
 the files of the League. The latter was sent 
 to Mr. Flagg and there is every reason to 
 believe it was received as my client's name 
 and address was on the envelope and it has 
 never been returned by the post office. 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 LAWRENCE G. GOODHART, 
 
 Attorney for the Woman's Rescue League." 
 
 If Goodhart questioned his client, Charlotte 
 Smith, he knew she could not produce one 
 witness or a scrap of evidence to substantiate 
 any one of the charges he made on behalf of 
 the bogus "League." And yet, cognizant of 
 this he deliberately made them again at my 
 hearing before the License Commissioner. He 
 made them knowing that every newspaper in 
 the city would publish them as true; and this 
 is just what they did do. 
 
 I quote from the minutes of my third hear- 
 ing: Mr. Flagg's lawyer: "Mrs. Smith, you 
 charge Mr. Flagg with having advertised in the 
 daily papers for girls to act as artists' models? 
 
 Mrs. Smith: "Yes." 
 
 "Can you mention the name of any paper 
 containing any such advertisement?" 
 
 Mrs. Smith: "No." 
 
 "As bearing on this subject it is stated that 
 a letter taken from the files of your 'League' 
 will prove interesting to the Commissioner. 
 Was any letter sent to the Commissioner or 
 have you any such letter in your possession?"
 
 116 
 
 Mrs. Smith: "I did have but can't find it." 
 
 "It is stated that the officers of your 'League' 
 stand ready to appear before his Honor at any 
 hearing he may fix. Is this true?" 
 
 Mrs. Smith: "I don't know." 
 
 "What is the 'Woman's Rescue League'?" 
 
 Mrs. Smith: "I am the president of the 
 National and International Woman's Rescue 
 League." 
 
 "Who is its vice-president?" 
 
 Objected to by Lawyer Goodhart. 
 
 Objection sustained by his "Honor" the 
 License Commissioner. 
 
 By Mr. Flagg's lawyer: "Who is its secre- 
 tary?" 
 
 Objected to by Goodhart. 
 
 Objection sustained by his "Honor" the 
 Commissioner. 
 
 "Did you tell Mr. Goodhart that Mr. Flagg 
 had served two years in Auburn State's 
 Prison?" 
 
 Mrs. Smith: "I told him I thought I had 
 seen it so reported in the newspapers." 
 
 "Mr. Goodhart stated in his letter to the 
 Commissioner that his client (meaning you) 
 stood ready to back up these charges with 
 ample and sufficient evidence. Did you tell 
 him you had such evidence?" 
 
 Mrs. Smith: "I did not." 
 
 "Did you tell Mr. Goodhart you could prove 
 Mr .Flagg had served a term in Auburn State's 
 Prison or any other State's prison?" 
 
 Mrs. Smith: "I did not." 
 
 "Did you tell him you could produce evi- 
 dence to prove that Mr. Flagg had sent girls to 
 houses of ill-repute or that you could mention 
 the names of any such girls?" 
 
 Mrs. Smith: "Well, I told him I would try 
 to find such evidence." 
 
 Mr. Flagg's lawyer: "Can you mention the
 
 117 
 
 name of any one girl, or the location of any 
 disreputable house, or person, to whom a girl 
 was ever sent by Mr. Flagg?" 
 
 Mrs. Smith: "No, but someone told me 
 he thought he had heard of some such thing. 
 
 Mr. Flagg' s lawyer: "Did you ever meet a 
 girl, or do you know of any person who ever 
 did meet one, who claimed to have been sent 
 by Mr. Flagg to such a resort or to such a 
 person?" 
 
 Mrs. Smith: "In going about so many 
 people tell me so many things I can't remem- 
 ber." 
 
 Mr. Flagg's lawyer: "Mrs. Smith and I 
 want you to think carefully before answering 
 this question can you produce any evidence 
 at all to substantiate any one of the charges 
 your so-called 'Woman's Rescue League* has 
 preferred against Jared Flagg?" 
 
 Mrs. Smith: "Since hearing that these 
 charges had been made in the newspapers I 
 have been looking and expecting to get such 
 evidence but have not been able to get hold of 
 any." 
 
 Mr. Flagg's lawyer: "That's all for the 
 present." 
 
 Now then, if Goodhart did not question his 
 client; did not know what her answers would 
 be to these questions until he heard them under 
 cross-examination, whom do you suppose he 
 did question? 
 
 No man, however depraved, would write a 
 letter containing such charges without an in- 
 centive. 
 
 When, where and by whom the letter was 
 originally composed I do not say. It was 
 dated April 3d, 1906, eight days after the 
 secret meeting held in Cullison's office and it 
 was signed "L. G. Goodhart, Attorney for the 
 Woman's Rescue League." But at this time
 
 118 
 
 Goodhart did not know me from Adam. He 
 may have heard of me, but he may have heard 
 of Adam, so who put him up to it? He says: 
 (and I am quoting from the minutes of my 
 third hearing) "I wrote that letter out of 
 charity. I am an American citizen" (he does 
 not look it but he says it) "and I am proud of 
 my native city, New York. I regaid this cur 
 a menace to the community and want to put 
 him where he belongs, behind bnrs." 
 
 Vituperation is not evidence but as Good- 
 hart had no evidence this was the best he could 
 do. As a rule persons do not pamper their 
 vanity to such an extent. Pride in itself would 
 not have induced him to ruin a fellow citizen's 
 business and reputation even if he had evidence 
 of wrongdoing. Much less then would his 
 pride have induced him to ruin my business 
 and reputation without a particle of evidence 
 of wrongdoing in or out of his possession. We 
 must therefore look for some stronger motive. 
 He had a motive an ulterior one and he 
 was afraid to let it be known, but inadvertent- 
 ly, after a burst of verbosity which betrayed 
 a knowledge of the phraseology of the slums 
 and just as he was about to take his seat, he 
 remarked (and I am quoting from the min- 
 utes) : "Austin Davis and other clients of mine 
 have been looking up Flagg's record and I 
 have been helping them." 
 
 Goodhart should have kept that information 
 to himself. 
 
 Before a lawyer will help a client is it not 
 customary for him to receive a retainer? Now 
 we are getting at the motive. Goodhart was 
 helping them. Charlotte Smith he says paid 
 him no fee. This seems reasonable. The 
 poor old lady had not given herself a benefit 
 performance for almost a year. But Davis 
 "Davis," Goodhart says, "and other clients"
 
 119 
 
 "other," of course there were others. Davis 
 was not the only one; and a little assessment 
 all around might have a tendency to make 
 Goodhart "get busy." But why, if they had 
 been looking up my record did he not invite 
 them down and give them all a chance to tell 
 what immoral, improper, fraudulent or illegal 
 acts of mine they had unearthed? 
 
 According to Goodhart' s own words they 
 had been looking up my record and yet not 
 one agent could be found to testify against me. 
 Does this not seem strange? Why could he 
 not coax Cullison or Davis to put in an appear- 
 ance and so give me an opportunity to ask 
 them why they had waited until this late date 
 to investigate my purity. 
 
 Cullison had known me for years. Davis 
 had known me five years. He had made 
 commissions by placing my clients on the stage. 
 He occasionally had accepted my hospitality 
 and I had also assisted him by referring young 
 women to his dancing academy which he con- 
 ducted in connection with his agency. He once 
 offered me' part of his tuition fees in consider- 
 ation of sending these pupils to him. But I felt 
 he was entitled to it all so refused with thanks. 
 
 Davis has written me many letters. One 
 will suffice to explain the tenor of all: 
 
 "AUSTIN DAVIS THEATRICAL 
 
 EXCHANGE" 
 45 West Twenty-ninth Street, 
 
 New York, September 29, 1904. 
 
 Mr. Jared Flagg: 
 
 Dear Sir A few lines to thank you for 
 remembering the office. The young lady 
 called to-day and arranged with my wife for 
 a course of chorus training. In regard to 
 the other young ladies I will let you hear 
 from me in a day or two as to the exact 
 time I shall want them in the city. I refer 
 to the six I spoke to you about. 
 
 Would be pleased to have you call any
 
 120 
 
 evening you can. With best wishes I re- 
 main, 
 
 Yours respectfully, 
 (signed) AUSTIN DAVIS." 
 
 The reader may notice this communication 
 is dated September 29, 1 904. It was along in 
 1905 and 1906 that Davis and Cullison and 
 others commenced to feel uneasy because the 
 managers were sending their orders direct to 
 me thus curtailing the fees formerly paid to 
 the agents. Now I was doing the "booking" 
 and yet only charging a two dollar fee. This, 
 Davis and some of the other agents thought, 
 was a little "too much of a good thing." Davis 
 became alarmed and started in with others, 
 so Lawyer Goodhart says, to look up my 
 record. He said it; and it is down in black 
 and white on the minutes of my third hearing 
 before the License Commissioner. But how 
 embarrassing I would have made it for these 
 agents had they "shown up" at my hearing. 
 Think of the letters I would have requested 
 them to read! 
 
 At the time of my hearing there was not in 
 all this city a theatrical agent who had not 
 transacted business with me; and letters! I 
 had them by the hundreds the most cordial 
 kind thanking me for favors extended. Think 
 how these men would have enjoyed reading 
 those letters and identifying their signatures. 
 Think of the questions I would have asked. 
 Would I have wanted to know why they had 
 waited so long before manifesting a disposition 
 to investigate my morality? Would any one 
 of them have dared give the real reason? Can 
 you see now why they kept in the background 
 and held their secret meetings behind locked 
 doors in Cullison's office and elected to make 
 "scapegoats" of Helen Arthur, Charlotte Smith, 
 Goodhart and Bogart?
 
 121 
 
 This quartette they put to the front to do 
 their "dirty work," and the following dates in- 
 dicate how well they did it: 
 
 The invitation to the secret Sunday night 
 meeting was dated March 20th, 1906. The 
 meeting itself was held five days later, March 
 25th. The letter introducing Charlotte Smith. 
 to Goodhart was dated one day later, March 
 26th. The letter containing the bogus charges 
 was dated eight days later, April 3d. The 
 letter notifying me to appear before the License 
 Commissioner was dated twenty-three days 
 later, April 26th. The hearing was held two 
 days later, April 28th, and May 2d, 1906, 
 three days later I was out of business. 
 
 Any missing links in this chain? Any link 
 which does not connect with the preceding and 
 succeeding one? Do not the dates "dovetail" 
 in perfect sequence as step by step the plot un- 
 folds itself? If dramatized could there be a 
 better satire on justice? 
 
 "All parties become partners to a conspiracy 
 even if the part they enact be a subordinate 
 one." 
 
 If the reader thinks that Goodhart who 
 drafted and signed the aforementioned letter 
 of April 3d, 1 906, charging me with having 
 enticed girls to houses of ill-repute, etc., com- 
 mitted an overt act, it is not essential that his- 
 criminal intent be shown, provided the letter 
 speaks for itself. If the reader is under the im- 
 pression that this letter reeking with spurious 
 lying statements does speak for itself, then he 
 is "at liberty to infer the intent." 
 
 So much for Goodhart. Now Bogart. Who 
 is Bogart? He is a man who swore when ap- 
 pointed Commissioner of Licenses to conduct 
 his office in an impartial manner. He is a man 
 whom the people, through their Mayor, have 
 vested with extraordinary powers; the power
 
 122 
 
 to act as prosecutor, defender, jury and judge. 
 Hence, it becomes his sacred duty to conserve 
 the rights of the accused as well as those of 
 the accusers and in taking his oath of office he 
 swore so to do. Keep this in mind when 
 reading the following. 
 
 Mr. Bogart knew twenty-five days before 
 notifying me to appear, that the charge of ad- 
 vertising for girls to act as artists' models was 
 to be made and he also knew that those who 
 were to prefer this charge had no grounds for 
 making it. 
 
 There is no law to prevent young women 
 from posing for artists. If there were no 
 models there would be no pictures or statuary. 
 But I never advertised for artists' models; and 
 had I attempted to, could not, for the reason 
 that no newspaper will accept an advertisement 
 of this nature. If there is such a thing as pre- 
 sumptive evidence it is to be presumed Mr. 
 Bogart was aware 1 of this fact. It is part of 
 his official business to scan daily every help 
 wanted advertisement that appears in the news- 
 papers. The city supplies him with papers 
 expressly for this purpose, and he must have 
 known the charge was ridiculous on its face. 
 Yet he not only authorized it to be made but 
 accepted the letter in which it was made as 
 evidence. 
 
 In his return to a writ of certiorari this man, 
 who had sworn to conduct the business of his 
 office impartially, admits he knew twenty-five 
 days before he notified me to appear that the 
 charge was to be made that I had served a 
 sentence in Auburn State's Prison. Think of 
 it. He admits he knew the accusation was to 
 be made twenty-five days before it was made; 
 and yet during all this time, three weeks and 
 over, this high official who had sworn to con- 
 serve the rights of the accused as well as those
 
 123 
 
 of the accuser did not telephone, telegraph, 
 write or cause to be written one word to the 
 Warden of Auburn State's Prison; nor did he, 
 or any other person, in any manner communi- 
 cate directly or indirectly with the Warden or 
 with any other person in authority at Auburn 
 or with the Prison Department at Albany, or 
 make the slightest effort or demand the slight- 
 est proof from any one to substantiate the 
 charge. 
 
 The official records of the License Bureau 
 show that this fact stands uncontradicted and 
 admitted. Yet, in the face of it, Bogart, 
 knowing I was transacting a large business as 
 shown by the bi-monthly reports taken from 
 my books by his Deputy Commissioners and 
 submitted to him for inspection, allowed them 
 to make this charge. Knowing, as he must 
 have known from these reports, that I had 
 thousands of clients, young women and men, in 
 this city and in all parts of the country, he 
 sanctioned the making of this charge, the 
 charge that I had served a sentence of two 
 years for decoying girls to houses of ill-repute. 
 Before he permitted this charge to be made in 
 public did he know it would be reported in 
 the public press; and that, true or false, my 
 business would be ruined and my reputation 
 damned? Yes, he knew it. The minutes of 
 the hearing prove I told him so myself. 
 
 Before the letter was read aloud it was 
 shown to me. I pronounced it a tissue of lies 
 and protested for all I was worth against having 
 it read in public until an investigation had been 
 made. But as their only aim and his only aim 
 was to have it published in the papers, he, 
 John N. Bogart, in my presence and against 
 my emphatic protest and with a police officer 
 at my back ready to yank me out of the room 
 if I created a scene, this public official whose
 
 124 
 
 sworn duty it was to guard my rights ordered 
 this letter of April 3d, 1 906, containing the 
 infamous and false charges to be read aloud 
 in public. 
 
 The good-will of a straightforward business 
 is valuable. Anything of value is property. 
 Without due process of law we have no right 
 to deprive a person of his property. Did 
 Bogart deprive me of my property (the value 
 of the good-will of my business) without due 
 process of law when he without having 
 made any investigation gave that letter to the 
 newspapers? 
 
 The injury was inflicted there and then. 
 Lies have a stupendous circulation. And so 
 quickly did the false report spread that almost 
 from the moment it was given to the press my 
 clients (and remember I had thousands of them 
 in all parts of the country with no way of im- 
 parting the truth to them) regarded me with 
 derision and my office as quarantined. From 
 that moment they shunned it as if it were in- 
 fected with a plague, and probably shuddered 
 at their supposed narrow escape. It may have 
 been difficult to believe that their agent had 
 been guilty of sending clients to houses of ill- 
 repute but it was in the newspapers and so 
 must be true. Then they began to fear that 
 their relatives and friends might believe they 
 had been sent to these houses of ill-repute. So 
 this vile charge reflected on them as well as 
 on me. 
 
 It was not only reported in the daily but also 
 in the weekly dramatic papers which are read 
 by theatrical people everywhere. 
 
 "Flagg served a sentence of two years in 
 Auburn State's Prison for the crime of decoy- 
 ing girls to houses of ill-repute," was the way 
 one leading theatrical paper The Morning 
 Telegraph of May 2d, 1906 announced the 
 news.
 
 125 
 
 And the New York Herald of April 29th, 
 1906, in headline letters stated: "Woman's 
 Leagues of high repute protest against a renew- 
 al of license for Jared Flagg. It is charged 
 he conducted his agency for improper pur- 
 poses." 
 
 The New York World of May 3d, 1906, 
 came out with the following: 
 
 "Flagg denied a license. It has been inti- 
 mated that his agency was in reality a feeder 
 for disorderly houses." 
 
 Other New York papers made similiar state- 
 ments. 
 
 Was this the news Bogart and the others 
 wanted my clients and their parents to read? 
 
 No man should be given the power to make 
 public without justification such a charge, cast- 
 ing such reflection on such a number of in- 
 nocent persons? 
 
 Fathers, mothers and brothers rushed to my 
 office. One brought a policeman. "My sister 
 my daughter was your client. Tell me 
 tell me the truth did you ever ever since 
 she has been coming to your office ask her 
 send her try to persuade her to go to a dis- 
 reputable house?" Trembling with rage; ready 
 to tear me to pieces; these questions were fired 
 at me; and had it not been for telephone mes- 
 sages received by them from Auburn Prison 
 authorities in response to urgent inquiries my 
 life would not have been worth two cents. 
 They upset chairs, jammed and surged and 
 forced their way into my private office. Be- 
 hind the uniformed officer I stood, poking him 
 in the ribs, urging him to act quickly and ar- 
 rest me, but he heeded me not the police 
 never were disposed to accommodate me. 
 
 And, only to think! Just one little cent 
 would have obviated placing me in this false
 
 126 
 
 position. A penny postal card addressed to 
 the Warden would have brought back the 
 truth and well John N. Bogart knew it. He 
 knew it so mightily well he did not do it; but 
 I did and received the following: 
 "To whom it may concern: 
 
 This is to certify a careful examination has been 
 made of the records of Auburn Prison, and the name, 
 Jared Flagg, does not appear among the names of 
 those received between the years of 1894 and 1898. 
 Furthermore, the above name does not appear on the 
 records prior or subsequent to the above mentioned 
 period. 
 
 (Signed) George W. Benham, 
 
 Warden Auburn State's Prison." 
 
 This document not only bore the official 
 seal of Auburn State's Prison but was certified 
 to by the Prison Department at Albany. 
 
 With this paper I personally appealed to the 
 newspapers to set me right with my clients and 
 the public by publishing it. But not one of 
 them, the city dailies or dramatic weeklies, al- 
 though not questioning its authenticity, would 
 do so. They published the lies but were un- 
 willing to publish the truth. 
 
 You can say what you like it was pretty 
 tough; they were pounding me hard. The 
 esteem of thousands one day; the condem- 
 nation of millions the next day. To stand up 
 under this, required fortitude. But I am not 
 asking commiseration. I want only justice. 
 
 Now if the reader thinks that Mr. Bogart by 
 abusing the power conferred upon him aided 
 another or others in bringing about this de- 
 plorable state of affairs; if he thinks he acted 
 unjustly in permitting Lawyer Goodhart, with- 
 out a semblance of evidence, without having 
 made the slightest investigation, to stand in 
 public and accuse me of having served a sen-
 
 127 
 
 tence in Auburn State's Prison for the crime 
 of decoying young girls to houseo of ill-repute 
 thereby deceiving numberless fathers and 
 mothers and causing them to visit their wrath 
 upon me, when he, Bogart, had had so much 
 time, twenty-five days, and could so easily 
 have ascertained the truth; and if the reader 
 thinks any or all of these acts tend to show 
 conspiracy on the part of Mr. Bogart, in con- 
 junction with others, then provided the afore- 
 mentioned "acts speak for themselves, he is at 
 liberty to infer the intent." So much for 
 Bogart. 
 
 All during the time between the secret Sun- 
 day night meeting in Cullison's office and up 
 to the very day of the hearing, I was in total 
 ignorance of what was going on. I did not 
 have an inkling of the trouble brewing, the 
 plot, the whispered conversations along the 
 "Rialto," the underhanded interviews at the 
 License Commissioner's office with Miss 
 Arthur, Mrs. Smith, Keating, Cullison, Good- 
 hart and others. All this time I was attending 
 to my business without a suspicion that others 
 were scheming to wreck it. The first intimation 
 of anything wrong came in a letter of which 
 the following is a copy: 
 
 "New York, April 26th, 1906. 
 Mr. Jared Flagg: 
 
 Dear Sir The Commissioner of Licenses 
 directs me to inform you that an objection 
 has been lodged against the issuance of a 
 license to you. 
 
 Mr. L. G. Goodhart, attorney for tlie 
 Woman's Rescue League, has entered the 
 objection and has asked for a hearing. The 
 Commissioner will hear his objection and 
 that of any person who may appear on 
 Saturday next, April 28th, 1906, at 10:30 
 o'clock a. m., in his office, and asks that 
 you be present or represented. 
 
 John J. Caldwell, Secretary." 
 Yours truly,
 
 128 
 
 Even after reading this I did not regard 
 the matter as serious. I knew no client of mine 
 had just cause to complain. I felt it was some 
 mistake and whatever it might be it would ad- 
 just itself. 
 
 This is what I saw in the office of the Com- 
 missioner, 277 Broadway, Borough of Man- 
 hattan, to wit: A large room and a long table, 
 at one end of which was a seat reserved for 
 the Commissioner. A stenographer occupied 
 a chair to the left. A police officer showed 
 me to the next chair. To the right of the 
 Commissioner's chair was F. L. C. Keating, 
 formerly License Commissioner but now at- 
 torney for the Theatrical Agents' Society. In 
 the chair next to his and directly opposite mine 
 was L. G. Goodhart, attorney for the alleged 
 "Woman's Rescue League," Then came Helen 
 Arthur, attorney for the Woman's Municipal 
 League, and several of her female cronies 
 not witnesses; she could produce none. At 
 the far end of the table a dozen or more re- 
 porters were seated. 
 
 In due time the "Honorable" John N. 
 Bogart, Commissioner of Licenses, who was to 
 act as Judge, emerged from the ante chamber 
 followed by Charlotte Smith, the self-styled 
 president of the alleged "National and Inter- 
 national Woman's Rescue League" for which 
 Lawyer Goodhart claimed to be counsel. 
 
 The Commissioner was solemn. All were 
 solemn and well they might be. They were 
 about to deprive a fellow-being of his in- 
 alienable right the right to make an honest 
 living in his chosen vocation. But this was 
 not all, they were about to steal from him his 
 name. Whatever it was worth to him in his 
 relation with mankind, they were about to take 
 it from him, not unintentionally but intention- 
 ally, knowing what they were doing, knowing
 
 129 
 
 and not caring, knowing they were thieves, 
 differing in no respect from the commonest 
 sneak-thief unless it be that they lacked his 
 courage. Generally when a thief is caught 
 "red-handed," he owns up like a "major." 
 But these long-faced sanctimonious Pharisees, 
 when caught in the act tried to lie out of it 
 by pretending they did not know what they 
 were doing. 
 
 At that time I, knowing nothing about the 
 plot to ruin me, and not for one moment sup- 
 posing the License Commissioner of this great 
 city was a man devoid of honor, attended the 
 hearing without counsel. Lawyer Goodhart 
 noticing this asked with an air of self-righteous- 
 ness if he might address a few words to the 
 defendant. "It is only fair that he should be 
 cautioned. Mr. Flagg is not a lawyer and we 
 do not wish to take undue advantage of him. 
 He should be told that anything he may say at 
 this hearing may hereafter be used against 
 him." 
 
 Think of a lawyer getting off a speech like 
 that and in the next breath reading aloud the 
 lies contained in the letter of April 3d, 1906. 
 He knew and they knew that they would be 
 unable to substantiate the charge that I had 
 served a term in any prison for the crime of 
 decoying girls to houses of ill-repute or for any 
 other crime; but they were cunning enough to 
 know that such an accusation would work in- 
 calculable injury to me. It was part of their 
 plot to end my career as an agent; the first 
 move, as it were, and the moment it had been 
 made every newspaper man present recorded 
 it. Then all eyes were turned on me. 
 
 Considering I had never even seen Auburn 
 State's Prison I expressed a desire to see its 
 records. "Certainly," replied the Commission- 
 er; and to preserve his dignity in the eyes of
 
 130 
 
 the reporters he turned to Lawyer Goodhart 
 and in a take-it-for-granted way said: "Coun- 
 selor, show Mr. Flagg your certified copy of 
 the prison records." He said it just as if he 
 supposed Goodhart really had such a copy 
 when he knew all the time, as Goodhart knew, 
 that no prison records implicating me existed. 
 Goodhart attributed his inability to procure 
 the records to his floating kidney which was 
 causing him trouble. This bit of side play was 
 obviously for the purpose of deceiving the re- 
 porters and conveying the impression to the 
 public that such a document existed. 
 
 "Give me three days and I will produce it,'* 
 said Mr. Goodhart. "Well, see that you do," 
 remarked the Commissioner, "or I shall renew 
 Mr. Flagg's license." An adjournment of 
 three days was then ordered ostensibly for this 
 purpose. 
 
 A direct charge if false can usually be re- 
 futed but an insinuation however groundless is 
 not easy to overthrow. 
 
 The Smith woman and the female lawyer, 
 Helen Arthur, aware of this, immediately after 
 the sham "hearing," unblushingly "button- 
 holed" the reporters and proceeded to throw 
 out hints "It is intimated," they whispered, 
 "that his agency is being used for immoral 
 purposes. No! We have no evidence but ex- 
 pect to have. Both Mrs. Smith and myself," 
 said Helen Arthur, "are heartily in accord and 
 together we propose to ferret out and follow 
 up every clue." 
 
 The reporters asked if any of my clients had 
 complained. "We do not like to say. No, 
 we can give no names or addresses at present 
 it would hardly be prudent. Later we may 
 make a statement to the press. If you mention 
 my name please note that I am at the head of 
 the 'Research Department of the Woman's
 
 131 
 
 Municipal League,' " said Miss Arthur. "And 
 if my name is to be mentioned," said Mrs. 
 Smith, "please note that I am the President of 
 the 'National and International Woman's Res- 
 cue League of New York, London and Paris. 
 No I We have no New York office. No! We 
 have no London office. No! We have no 
 Paris office; but we expect to have," remarked 
 Mrs. Smith as she smilingly bid the Com- 
 missioner and reporters adieu. 
 
 When two women posing as reformers and 
 thirsting for free newspaper advertising get 
 their clutches on a dozen or more "space 
 writers" there is no computing the damage 
 they may do. 
 
 Now for the moment place yourself in my 
 position, try to imagine what your sensations 
 would have been the morning after these fe- 
 male mischief makers had got in their "fine 
 work" on the reporters at this burlesque 
 "hearing." If with honor and integrity you 
 had built up a business from nothing to some- 
 thing; if for six long years, Winter and Summer, 
 you had worked early and late; if you had 
 dealt and talked with thousands of people, 
 ambitious, intelligent and worthy young women 
 and young men, all eager to "make good" and 
 advance in their profession; if you had by 
 square dealing gained their esteem; if they not 
 only returned year after year to do business 
 with you, but referred their friends to you; if 
 you were acquainted with many of their par- 
 ents, and if these fathers and these mothers 
 also reposed confidence in you, respected you, 
 depended on your honesty and judgment to 
 advise them with which managers, in which 
 companies, it would be safe to entrust their 
 sons and daughters; and if you had in the 
 profession many acquaintances, playwrights of 
 renown, actors and actresses whose names are
 
 132 
 
 known over the breadth of the land; and if 
 you were acquainted with all the leading stage 
 directors, honorable men, anxious to aid you, 
 to see you prosper, men who did not hesitate 
 to endorse you, to recommend you, and who 
 would go out of their way to favor you; if you 
 had such business acquaintances, and if you 
 felt grateful; if you had failed in previous 
 undertakings, but could now see success ahead ; 
 and if it made life seem worth living; if it 
 seemed to you (as it did to me) that you were 
 accomplishing something in the world, pro- 
 curing honest employment for thousands of 
 honest persons, and if it were a greater satis- 
 faction to you even than the cash profits; if 
 you valued more highly than money, the high 
 regard in which you were held by those with 
 whom you had business dealings; in short, if 
 you were at peace with the world, if you had 
 enemies, but were willing to overlook and for- 
 get past differences, willing to blame yourself 
 instead of them; if you had thought it all over 
 and were willing to let bygones be bygones, 
 willing to forgive everyone, feeling that there 
 was, that there is, in each man's life sorrow 
 and suffering enough to disarm you of all 
 hostility; if this were how you felt; and if you 
 had friends, not the fair-weather kind, the kind 
 that are afflicted with affected accents or with 
 social aspirations and whose knees quake at 
 the thought of appearing as witnesses in courts 
 of law or of getting their names in newspapers, 
 not the moral cowards who value above all 
 earthly possessions the superficial courtesies ex- 
 tended to them by members of their social 
 set I do not mean that kind but real friends, 
 the kind that don't scare and will stand by, 
 shoulder to shoulder with you, "true as steel," 
 when clouds are gathering and when the future 
 looks dark; if you had such friends; and if you
 
 133 
 
 had relatives who felt you had disgraced the 
 family name, though not intentionally, and 
 were therefore staunch and true, uncles, aunts, 
 cousins, nieces, and nephews; and if you had 
 brothers, any one of whom would share his 
 last dollar with you, brothers who would not 
 permit any man or woman, not even an old 
 friend of the family, to malign you; if you had 
 such brothers whom you loved and a mother 
 whom you loved and sisters whom you loved, 
 how would you feel to have her and them 
 and all the others some fine morning open 
 the newspapers not one but all the papers 
 and read that powerful societies the The- 
 atrical Agents' Society and also Benevolent 
 Women's Leagues of high repute had intimated 
 i n t i m a t e d that your place of business 
 your office was not what it appeared to be 
 a legitimate agency but a "feeder" for dis- 
 orderly houses; how do you think you would 
 feel? How do you think I felt?
 
 134 
 
 CHAPTER 8. 
 
 A swelled head is incurable, yet however 
 arrogant a public official may be to individuals, 
 he fears the people as a whole. Bogart, the 
 license official, feared the newspapers the 
 people and this explains why he laid stress 
 on the three days adjournment. 
 
 ."I shall grant this adjournment," he said, 
 "for the purpose of giving us time to com- 
 municate with the warden, and if copies of the 
 prison records implicating Mr. Flagg are not 
 here in three days I shall issue a license to 
 him." These are his words copied from the 
 minutes and they sounded all right to the re- 
 porters but all wrong to me. Why should a 
 person who had had twenty-five days to in- 
 vestigate a simple matter want three days 
 more? It was a subterfuge to create the im- 
 pression I had in reality served such a term and 
 in three days proof thereof would be forth- 
 coming. This was the impression the news- 
 papers conveyed to the public. But the proof 
 did not come; and yet Mr. Bogart despite his 
 promise did not give me my license. 
 
 What would you, the reader, say if you in 
 place of me had been accused of a crime and 
 brought before a judge and had told him you 
 were falsely accused what would you say if 
 he had said to you, "All right, if I find that to 
 be true I will see that you are not punished, 
 and in order to give myself time to investigate 
 I shall lay your case over for three days?" 
 
 That might seem straight but at the expira- 
 tion of three days the expiration suppose
 
 133 
 
 then you had asked his "Honor" if he had 
 made the investigation; what would you say if 
 he told you he had not, but in the exercise of 
 his "discretion'' has decided to punish you 
 anyway, with or without evidence, what kind 
 of judge would you say you were up against? 
 The "Honorable" John N. Bogart sent for 
 no proof before ordering the charge to be 
 made against me. He sent for no proof after 
 ordering the charge to be made against me. 
 I hold a letter signed by the Warden of Auburn 
 Prison to the effect that no person (that is, 
 among the conspirators) either before or after 
 the charge was made public had inquired re- 
 garding the matter. 
 
 Had Mr. Bogart or any of the others written 
 he would have received word that there was 
 no truth in the charge. But did Mr. Bogart 
 or the others have any use for the truth? They 
 were only interested in covering up the truth. 
 They were out to injure me and the injury was 
 inflicted the moment the charge was made 
 against me in public. 
 
 In the License Bureau dishonest rulings were 
 the rule and my case was not an exception. 
 
 The New York Evening Journal, under date 
 of November 5th, 1908, when commenting on 
 a preliminary report made to Mayor McClell- 
 an by the Commissioner of Accounts stated, 
 "the License Bureau of this city is rotten to the 
 core." 
 
 It took them a long time to find it out. I 
 could have given them this information three 
 years before. 
 
 No man should be privileged to summon a 
 reputable citizen to appear at a public hearing 
 for the purpose of ruining his business and 
 reputation. But Mr. Bogart had this preroga- 
 tive. He occupied a position so exalted he 
 was privileged to ignore all evidence however
 
 136 
 
 vital and under the license law could in the 
 "exercise of his discretion" ruin a man's busi- 
 ness and reputation without rendering himself 
 amenable to the law. This is what he said 
 and I guess he is correct. 
 
 Before recording the events of my second 
 session with his "Honor" the reader should 
 be informed of all that took place during the 
 three days interval between the first and second 
 hearings. They were not considerate enough 
 to inform me in advance but I shall inform the 
 reader. 
 
 Having made this Auburn Prison charge 
 against me without an atom of evidence they 
 decided before making a second charge to 
 manufacture a little evidence. 
 
 In the License Bureau they had a young 
 lawyer, Henry N. Steinert. Mr. Steinert says 
 Mr. Bogart told him to go to the General 
 Sessions Court and have a talk with William 
 Hanna. Mr. Hanna is first assistant to Chief 
 Clerk Edward R. Carroll of the said court. 
 Bogart won't tell what he told Steinert to say 
 to Hanna. Steinert won't tell what he told 
 Hanna to say to Carroll and Hanna won't tell 
 what he told Carroll to do, but as I shall tell 
 you what Carroll did do you can draw your 
 own conclusions. 
 
 This Chief Clerk has charge of the official 
 records of said court. The records of my 
 "flat trial" were in his custody. He held the 
 combination to the vault in which they were 
 kept. Bogart knew this and Bogart said some- 
 thing to Steinert. Do not forget that. Stein- 
 ert said something to Hanna. Keep this in 
 mind also. And after Hanna had said some- 
 thing to Carroll, Carroll entered the vault and 
 "dug up" the records of my "flat trial." 
 
 To prove an innocent person guilty in New 
 York City, that is, to legally prove a person
 
 137 
 
 guilty of any count in an indictment on which 
 he had been adjudged not guilty it is necessary 
 to go through more or less "red tape." 
 
 As stated, years ago I had been adjudged 
 not guilty of renting flats for immoral purposes. 
 Therefore, to legally prove I was guilty of this 
 offense, it was essential not exactly to alter all 
 the minutes of my trial on file in the said 
 court, but simply to have the chief clerk there- 
 of draft a copy of the said minutes with such 
 little variations as might be necessary to make 
 it easy for the License Commissioner to per- 
 suade himself the verdict of my jury was not 
 what it purported to be. 
 
 This was done. 
 
 In the original records the word "misde- 
 meanor" appears. In the certified copy the 
 word "felony" takes its place. 
 
 In the original the word "indicted" appears. 
 In the certified copy the word ' "convicted" 
 takes its place. 
 
 In the original the word "dismissed" ap- 
 pears. In the certified copy the word "sen- 
 tenced" takes its place. 
 
 When a sworn certified copy of the minutes 
 of a trial carries the signature of the chief 
 clerk of the court in which the case was tried 
 also the official seal it is regarded as "knock- 
 down" evidence. 
 
 This counterfeit certificate carried the seal of 
 the General Sessions Court. William Hanna 
 stamped it thereon. It also carried the signa- 
 ture of the chief clerk, E. R. Carroll. After 
 Mr. Carroll had affixed his signature he gave 
 it to Lawyer Steinert of the License Bureau 
 who carried it from the Criminal Courts Build- 
 ing to Commissioner Bogart. Can you arrive 
 at a conclusion now as to what Bogart said 
 to Steinert, and what Steinert said to Hanna, 
 and what Hanna said to Carroll?
 
 138 
 
 Nothing is easier than to deceive oneself. I 
 said to myself, why retain a lawyer to prove I 
 had not served a term in Auburn State's Prison 
 when all the lawyers in the land could not 
 prove I had ever seen the inside or even the 
 outside of its walls? Knowing nothing of what 
 had taken place during the interval this was 
 how I reasoned, so at the expiration of the 
 three days adjournment in I walked without a 
 lawyer, and there they were Charlotte Smith 
 with her white kid gloves, Lawyer Goodhart, 
 with his two pair of spectacles on his nose, 
 Bogart, the "Honorable," he was there; ex- 
 License Commissioner Keating was there also 
 notwithstanding that the Theatrical Agents' 
 Society which he was supposed to represent had 
 notified the press, the License Commissioner 
 and myself that it had no complaints to make 
 against me. 
 
 The following is a copy of the letter I re- 
 ceived and Bogart and the press recdived 
 similar letters. 
 
 "Jared Flagg, Esq. 
 
 Dear Sir Our association has made no 
 charges against you, nor are any pending. 
 (Signed) James J. Armstrong. 
 President Theatrical Association 
 1431 & 1433 Broadway, N. Y. City." 
 
 Helen Arthur also sent a letter of which the 
 following is a copy: 
 
 "License Commissioner: 
 
 Dear Sir: As we have no complaint to 
 make against Jared Flagg we hereby petition 
 you to issue a theatrical agent's license to 
 him. 
 
 Helen Arthur, 
 
 Woman's Municipal League 
 1 9 East Twenty-sixth Street, N. Y. City." 
 
 Miss Arthur was not present at this second 
 hearing, but the reporters were all there and 
 when I glanced at their end of the table they
 
 139 
 
 nodded politely. This was a bad omen and I 
 commenced to feel uncomfortable. Could it 
 be possible they were going to spring some- 
 thing new on me? Some other bogus charge? 
 This thought flashed through my mind; and I 
 opened the meeting without being asked to do 
 so by requesting the Commissioner to produce 
 the Auburn Prison record and which Lawyer 
 Goodhart had agreed to present at this hearing; 
 but, barring myself no one would allude to 
 Auburn State's Prison. 
 
 The Commissioner whom I was addressing 
 ignored me entirely but called Lawyer Good- 
 hart aside and in a low tone of voice (too low 
 for the reporters to hear but not so low that I 
 was unable to hear) said to him, "You take this 
 document and present it to me at the hearing." 
 Goodhart took the bogus certificate which 
 had been made at Bogart's request and which 
 Carroll had signed. First Goodhart, standing 
 by a window away from all, read it to himself. 
 He then came over to the table and read the 
 document impressively to the Commissioner. 
 
 Goodhart then walked to where the report- 
 ers were seated ; showed the document to them ; 
 and they scrutinized it intently and copied 
 certain portions. It was then taken to the 
 other end of the table and given to the Com- 
 missioner and he passed it to me for inspection. 
 If ever I inspected a paper it was that one. 
 With care and deliberation I read every word. 
 Little did I dream of the diabolical plot 
 which was being perpetrated on me. 
 
 The document had every appearance of 
 being authentic. After having read it twice 
 over, once more I looked at the words 
 "felony," "convicted," "sentenced." Could 
 I believe my own eyes? Was I worse than I 
 thought I was? And again I looked, I looked 
 at the gilt seal which was as large as a small 
 sized buckwheat cake.
 
 140 
 
 We seldom regret having said too little. At 
 the first hearing Goodhart had been granted 
 without question a three days adjournment. 
 Now I asked for a like adjournment but in- 
 stantly there was a storm of protest. "If not 
 three, make it one. Give me a day to in- 
 vestigate this matter. If true you can act on 
 it to-morrow, I said. He made no reply. 
 Lawyers Goodhart and Keating seeing he 
 hesitated took him aside and whispered. It 
 was the order of the day to take the judge 
 aside and whisper to him, and when I objected 
 his "Honor" replied: "You might have the 
 right to object in a court of law, but not here." 
 The whispered conversation produced the de- 
 sired effect for when he returned to his seat he 
 was obdurate. He would not listen to an ad- 
 journment of even one day. And with the 
 fraudulent certified copy of the court records 
 (held high above his head) in which the word 
 "felony" had been substituted for the word 
 "misdemeanor;* and the word "convicted" 
 substituted for the word "indicted;" and the 
 word "sentenced" substituted for the word 
 "dismissed;" he, the so-called "Honorable" 
 John N. Bogart, who had given himself and 
 the others an adjournment of three days and 
 had peremptorily refused to grant me an ad- 
 journment of even one day, ruled as follows 
 (copied from the official minutes) : 
 By the License Commissioner: 
 "I am going to save a lot of time. I accept 
 this document as being a true statement that 
 Jared Flagg was convicted of keeping a dis- 
 orderly house and fined and imprisoned. I am 
 going to rule that anyone convicted of keeping 
 a disorderly house is not entitled to an agency 
 license." Then turning to me he said, "Your 
 application for a renewal of your license i% 
 denied.'
 
 141 
 
 This settled it, and they hurried from the 
 room. All left with the exception of the 
 policeman and myself. I didn't move. I was 
 nonplused. Was it true? Could it be true? 
 But true or false my life had been blasted. 
 This much at that time I knew. Now in the 
 eyes of the public I was a felon; I was no 
 longer a citizen of the United States; no longer 
 had the right to vote; could no longer hold 
 my head erect and look decent people in 
 the face; mortified, chagrined, humiliated, 
 my name vilified, my reputation gone, my 
 business ruined. Legally branded an out- 
 cast. Ostracised, banished and subjected to 
 the ridicule, scorn and hatred of my fellow 
 citizens; the convicted keeper of a baudy 
 house, a disgrace to my family, to the com- 
 munity and to myself. This would be the 
 verdict of the people. It would be impossible 
 for them to reach any other decision, and de- 
 spite anything I could say or do thousands 
 would condemn me; would believe the forged 
 document to be true; thousands would read 
 the newspapers, and every paper in the city 
 English, French, Italian, Spanish and Hebrew 
 would and did proclaim it as true broadcast 
 to the world.
 
 142 
 
 CHAPTER 9 
 
 After they had taken advantage of my in- 
 experience I retained a lawyer and it did not 
 take him long to discover a forgery had been 
 committed. 
 
 Suits were brought against Edward R. Car- 
 roll. Chief Clerk of the Court of General 
 Sessions, and also against his assistant, William 
 Hanna. Four in all, twenty-five thousand 
 dollars each, two for damages and two for 
 libel per se all of which is a matter of public 
 record. 
 
 The Commissioner after illegally depriving 
 me of my license probably thought that would 
 be the last he would hear of the matter. But 
 when it was made clear to me that the docu- 
 ment was a certified forgery I called and asked 
 him to annul his decision. He refused, where- 
 upon my lawyer appealed to the Corporation 
 Counsel. It is this official's duty among other 
 things to defend the License Commissioner. 
 My particular matter was placed in charge of 
 Assistant Corporation Counsel Charles O'Neill 
 and after investigating he advised Mr. Bogart 
 to retract. But as no retraction was forth- 
 coming my attorney carried the case to the 
 Appellate Division of the Supreme Court. 
 This move made Mr. Bogart sit up and take 
 notice. Under the law if he allowed my case 
 to reach this court his rulings would have to be 
 reviewed by the Appellate Judges and what 
 would they have to say about the forged certif- 
 icate and the perjured testimony?
 
 143 
 
 If any one knew, Bogart knew that in the 
 Appellate Court they "did things differently" 
 differently from the manner in which he 
 "did things." It was he who so informed us. 
 His exact words copied from the minutes 
 read: "You might have that right in a court 
 of law but we do things differently here." By 
 "we" he meant himself and by "here** he 
 meant the License Bureau. And now my case 
 was going to a different tribunal and Bogart, 
 judging from his frantic efforts, was more than 
 anxious to have it taken off this calendar and 
 brought back to him where it could and would 
 be dealt with "differently." He knew if the 
 case should be reviewed by this high court it 
 would go hard with him whereas he wanted it 
 to go hard with me. And in order that it might 
 go hard with me and that I might be placed at 
 his mercy, and that his crooked acts might not 
 be passed upon by the Appellate Judges, ha 
 finally accepted the advice of Assistant Cor- 
 poration Counsel, O'Neil and owned up to the 
 truth and sent me a letter of which the follow- 
 ing is a copy: 
 
 "New York, July 7, 1906. 
 Mr. Jared Flagg: 
 
 Sir I hereby notify you that the deter- 
 mination reached by me on May 2, 1906, 
 whereby your application for a license to 
 keep a theatrical agency was denied has been 
 annulled by me on the ground that it ap- 
 pears the record of the Court of General 
 Sessions offered in evidence relative to your 
 trial in that court was erroneously certified 
 by the clerk thereof. 
 
 You are hereby notified that a hearing 
 upon your application will be held on the 
 23d day of July, 1906, at 2:30 P. M., at this 
 office. 
 
 Respectfully yours, 
 (Signed) John N. Bogart, 
 
 Commissioner of Licenses." 
 
 At first he had refused but he was "annul- 
 ling" all right now.
 
 144 
 
 "Erroneously" means falsely, and in making 
 his confession he should have used the word 
 falsely but he liked the sound of the other 
 better. 
 
 This solitary, false document, although not 
 even remotely related to my theatrical business 
 was the only evidence used against me. This 
 is the point I want to make clear. No witness, 
 no client, no person in any way connected 
 with my agency or the theatrical profession 
 appeared before the License Commissioner to 
 testify against me. And it was solely on this 
 one false document, which had nothing to do 
 with the theatrical business, which referred only 
 to my "flat" trial of years ago, 1 896, that my 
 application made ten years later, 1 906, for a 
 theatrical agent's license was denied. There- 
 fore, the fact that Commissioner Bogart now, 
 in writing, over his own signature, admits the 
 document was "erroneously certified" is equiv- 
 alent to admitting that I lost my business, its 
 good will, my good name, the esteem of my 
 customers, the confidence of their parents, the 
 respect of the community and all else on a 
 false document. Perjury forgery certified 
 lies. 
 
 Up to that time the going had been toler- 
 ably smooth and had I when first approached 
 by the police paid tribute to them in the shape 
 of "blood money," I should not be talking 
 about "fake hearings" and erroneously certi- 
 fied legal documents. There would have been 
 no scurrilous newspaper articles. I would have 
 occupied a position above reproach. I would 
 have been rich. Even had I given the police 
 every dollar of the profits accruing from my 
 flats the advance in New York real estate has 
 been so great that had I been able to hold 
 mine it would in itself have made me finan-
 
 J45 
 
 cially independent. At a low estimate . this 
 advance in value has exceeded a million dol- 
 lars. 
 
 If money covers a multitude of sins, consider- 
 ing I am not half as bad as I have been painted, 
 do you not suppose with such a fortune I could 
 have covered all my sins? I would have been 
 regarded a paragon of propriety. Whereas 
 now I doubt if I would be considered eligible 
 even to the "Four Hundred." 
 
 This is what a man sometimes gets for stand- 
 ing on principle; but I did it, and a volley of 
 unprintable oaths and the clinched fist of a 
 police captain shaken in front of my nose could 
 not make me swerve. No "third degree," no 
 threat, not even dire ruin could move me. But 
 men have been moved by threats less aggravat- 
 ing. New York is full of blackmailers; and 
 many persons, posing as respectable, have 
 yielded to their demands and paid "hush- 
 money" and sacrificed self-respect that they 
 might retain the respect of others. No person 
 can however, truthfully say I ever debauched 
 my honor for the sake of social or financial 
 gain. And it was because Mr. Bogart knew I 
 was no hypocrite and had nothing to cover up 
 that he did not want the judges of the Ap- 
 pellate Court to hear my story. To prevent 
 me from telling it he not only, as stated, owned 
 up to the truth but in the concluding paragraph 
 of his confessing letter requested me to appear 
 before him for a rehearing. This was not to 
 my liking. I had had all the hearings I wanted 
 and to restrain him from holding more in my 
 case served him with a temporary injunction. 
 It was at this juncture that his Royal Highness 
 did some tall prevaricating. He had ordered 
 me to come back for a rehearing and I had 
 "clapped" an injunction on him which put an 
 end to further hearings until such time as he
 
 146 
 
 could have the injunction vacated. The un- 
 certainty as to whether it could be vacated 
 riled him and although I do not wish it under- 
 stood he so far forgot himself as to raise his 
 right hand and swear before Almighty God 
 to a lie I do want it known that he affixed his 
 signature to several lies. John N. Bogart is 
 not a man to commit perjury; that would be 
 against his principles; he knows the penalty; 
 but if caught in a compromising position he will 
 not scruple to affix his signature to a lie, as is 
 shown in his Return (his defense) to the Writ 
 of Certiorari I brought against him and whicK 
 was pending before the Appellate Division of 
 the Supreme Court. In this return which was 
 to be read by the Judges he said the Theatrical 
 Agents' Society, as a Society, and the Woman's 
 Municipal League, as a League, and also the 
 Woman's Rescue League, as a League, had ap- 
 peared before him as complainants against me. 
 His exact words copied from the court records 
 were as follows: 
 
 "Lawrence G. Goodhart, 21 Park Row, ap- 
 pears for the Woman's Rescue League. 
 
 The Theatrical Agents' Society appears by 
 Frederick L. C. Keating, of 38 Park Row. 
 
 The Woman's Municipal League appears by 
 Miss Helen Arthur, of 277 Broadway. ' 
 
 On June 1 3th, 1 906, he wrote the Judges of 
 the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court 
 that the Theatrical Agents' Society appeared 
 before him on April 28, 1 906. (The word 
 "appeared" when used in this legal sense meant 
 that the Agents' Society as a body had put in 
 an appearance against me. Mr. Bogart knew 
 that was not true. On April 28th, 1906, a 
 month and a half before he affixed his signature 
 to this false statement, when the question, at 
 my first hearing, was asked Lawyer Keating 
 (and Bogart himself asked the question) "Do
 
 147 
 
 you appear here for the Agents' Society?" 
 Mr. Keating replied: (and I am quoting the 
 minutes) "No, your Honor, the Theatrical 
 Agents' Society does not appear against Mr. 
 Flagg. I am simply here as a spectator and 
 to see that Mr. Flagg receives a square deal." 
 
 To this answer as is shown by the minutes 
 Bogart remarked: "Mr. Flagg seems com- 
 petent to look after his own affairs.," 
 
 The very next day, April 29th, 1 906, in 
 response to a letter from me the Theatrical 
 Agents' Society notified Bogart in writing that 
 it had not appeared against me. Furthermore, 
 I, personally, showed Mr. Bogart a letter I still 
 hold signed by the President of the said society, 
 J. J. Armstrong, to the effect that he had 
 lodged no complaint against me and had no 
 complaint to make. But, despite all this, a 
 month and a half later, June 1 3th, 1 906, over 
 his signature Mr. Bogart informed the Appel- 
 late Judges that the Theatrical Agents* Society 
 appeared before him on April 28th, 1906, 
 represented by Lawyer Keating. He would 
 not swear to it: Bogart would not commit per- 
 jury; that would be against his principles; he 
 knows the penalty; but he would and did affix 
 his signature to this lie. 
 
 When in the so-called Return to the same 
 Writ he informed the Judges that the Woman's 
 Municipal League had appeared before him 
 represented by Miss Helen Arthur he knew this 
 was not so. He had asked Miss Arthur as a 
 special favor to him to be present "with or 
 without a complaint," and simply to accom- 
 modate him she was present without a com- 
 plaint. When Mr. Bogart asked if her League 
 had any charges to make against me she re- 
 plied (and I am quoting the minutes) "We 
 have no complaint." Later she not only put 
 this in writing (that she had no complaint) but
 
 148 
 
 requested the Commissioner to grant me a 
 license. I, furthermore, showed Mr. Bogart a 
 letter which I hold signed by the Woman's 
 Municipal League to this same effect. And 
 yet despite all this proof he notified the Appel- 
 late Judges a month and a half thereafter, June 
 1 3, 1 906, that the Woman's Municipal League 
 had appeared before him at my first hearing, 
 April 28th, 1 906, and was represented by 
 Miss Helen Arthur. He would not swear to it; 
 Bogart would not commit perjury: that would 
 be against his principles; he knows the penalty; 
 but he would and did affix his signature to this 
 lie. 
 
 Also when he made the statement in the 
 same Return to the same Writ and to the same 
 judges that the Woman's Rescue League had 
 appeared and was represented by Lawrence G. 
 Goodhart he knew it was false, and I will ex- 
 plain why he knew it. When my lawyer was 
 cross-questioning Charlotte Smith regarding her 
 fake "League" and she was becoming en- 
 tangled and her lawyer was objecting he, 
 Bogart, made the following remark to my law- 
 yer (copied from the minutes) "You might 
 have that right in a court of law, but we do 
 things differently here, and I shall not allow any 
 questions regarding this League" (meaning the 
 fake "Woman's Rescue League") "because ac- 
 cording to the statement of the attorney who 
 represents this witness" (meaning Charlotte 
 Smith) "no such League appears here or is 
 represented before me." Thfs as per the 
 official minutes is what he said. "No such 
 League appears here or is represented before 
 me." But, as per the official Court Records, 
 he wrote the Appellate Judges that such a 
 League had appeared before him at my first 
 hearing, April 28th, 1 906 ,and was represented 
 by Lawyer Goodhart. He wouldn't swear to
 
 149 
 
 it; Bogart wouldn't commit perjury; that 
 would be against his principles; he knows the 
 penalty; but he would and did affix his 
 signature to this lie. 
 
 He prepared, signed and filed these and 
 other false statements so in case he had to 
 appear before the Appellate Judges he seem- 
 ingly would have some ground for his defense 
 to my writ. But in the meantime he put forth 
 every effort to have the injunction vacated. 
 After many delays and a bitter legal fight, 
 Justice V. Dowling ordered it vacated; so after 
 all I was obliged to appear again before his 
 "Honor," the License Commissioner. 
 
 Every time I think of these return-hearings 
 I experience a touch of sea-sickness. Talk, 
 talk, talk, quibbling all the time, first one law- 
 yer and then another, over matters wholly 
 irrelevant and making no progress. 
 
 To appeal a case the testimony for and 
 against the defendant must be printed! and 
 bound at the defendant's expense before it can 
 be submitted to the higher court. In this case 
 I was the defendant and in the event of an 
 appeal each word would cost me just so much 
 money to print. Therefore, to check this flow 
 of expensive words at my subsequent hearings 
 I determined to eliminate Lawyers Keating and 
 Goodhart; and with this end in view notified 
 them that if they took further part, ever again, 
 at my hearings before the Commissioner I 
 would bring them up before the Lawyers 
 Grievance Committee and give them an op- 
 portunity to show cause why they should not 
 be disbarred as co-conspirators in the plot to 
 deprive me of my license. This notification 
 which was duly drawn up after I had had a 
 talk with Assistant District Attorney Marshall 
 must have frightened the life out of these two 
 "legal lights," for they dropped Bogart like a 
 "hot potato."
 
 150 
 
 Tell a lawyer engaged in a crooked case to 
 quit or you will move to have him disbarred 
 and he will quit every time quit in a hurry. 
 But with the "Honorable" John N. Bogart it 
 was different. He could not quit. The con- 
 spirators (certain agents and others previously 
 named) had influence with certain political 
 bosses and Bogart may have received orders 
 from someone higher up, possibly a "Tammany 
 ward heeler;'* and his salary, one hundred 
 dollars a week, may have been at stake; so he 
 had to keep the hearings going and at the pro- 
 gress he was making it would have taken him a 
 year or more to complete the job. It was lot, 
 he said, so much a question of virtue at the 
 present time. He admitted I might now be a 
 moral man, but the question he wished to de- 
 termine even if it took a year was, had I always 
 lived a moral life? In his opinion any man 
 who at any period had been guilty of "sowing 
 wild oats" was not a fit person to be a theatric- 
 al agent. You have no idea, unless you have 
 been one yourself, what an exemplary lot they, 
 the theatrical agents of this city, are. And so 
 the make-believe hearings dragged on month 
 after month; and the money I had saved was 
 melting as money melts when everything is 
 going out and nothing coming in. It was when 
 things were in this precarious condition that I 
 ran up against a snag, the worst I had struck, 
 a letter written by my brother Ernest and which 
 reads as follows: 
 
 "If I were you I would waste no more 
 time or money in trying to procure a license. 
 It is not worth it, and I wish you would cut 
 loose from this whole unsavory mess and 
 turn your attention to something worthy of 
 you and your bringing up. I am sure if 
 you look you will find a profitable opening. 
 You may think your record a handicap, but
 
 131 
 
 I doubt if it will prove as much of a one as 
 you imagine. If you will take my advice I 
 will show my confidence by not limiting you 
 in time or amount. When you want money 
 ask for it and I will send it to you." 
 
 Before I had half finished reading this letter 
 my arms dropped. Here was where I could 
 not fight. I knew he did not realize what he 
 was asking me to do, but that did not help 
 matters. He was my brother, and it is differ- 
 ent when it is your brother. 
 
 Without a quibble, an explanation, or an 
 interview, just as if it were a matter of small 
 moment, just as if it were easy to disregard the 
 verdict of those who had formerly respected 
 me, I requested my lawyer to notify the 
 Commissioner that I would withdraw my ap- 
 plication for a license. In reply to this noti- 
 fication we received a letter of which the 
 following is a copy: 
 
 "New York, February 6, 1907. 
 H. D. Mildeberger, Esq., 
 
 Attorney-at-Law. 
 
 Dear Sir Your communication, as attorney 
 for Jared Flagg, notifying me that he wished 
 to withdraw his application for a license 
 has been received, accepted and filed. 
 Yours truly, 
 
 (Signed) John N. Bogart, 
 Commissioner of Licenses." 
 
 The day this letter was received it was for- 
 warded to my brother, and the following day 
 he wrote me, "I am sure you have made a wise 
 decision." 
 
 Engrossed in vast enterprises the design- 
 ing of the Annapolis Naval Academy, St. 
 Luke's Hospital and the Singer Building in 
 New York and other great buildings involv- 
 ing millions of dollars and the employment 
 of thousands of men, my brother had had no 
 time to look into my affairs. He only knew 
 I had been dealing with theatrical people, and
 
 152 
 
 had not made a fortune. And on general 
 principles, without being familiar with the 
 thousand and one circumstances surrounding 
 the case, he had, out of the kindness of his 
 heart, written the aforementioned letter. Had 
 it come from another I would have thanked 
 that other for his advice and offer, but would 
 have declined both. 
 
 Assistant District Attorney Marshall and 
 every one cognizant of the truth said my 
 license was being withheld from me illegally; 
 and I was terribly anxious that this fact should 
 be known. If I only could have advertised 
 that it was once more hanging in the same 
 old frame over my desk that was all I wanted 
 my name. 
 
 The eyes of the profession were upon me. 
 Remember I was known, known clear across 
 the continent, wherever musical comedies were 
 booked. Thousands were waiting and wonder- 
 ing whether I would win or lose. The with- 
 holding or the granting of that little piece of 
 printed paper, to me, meant everything. It 
 could give to or it could take from me that 
 which money could not buy. In the estimation 
 of all these people thousands of people it 
 meant one thing or the other, an upright man or 
 a degenerate. What then would be the infer- 
 ence now that I had allowed the matter to go by 
 default? What reason would the editors of 
 the newspapers assign? 
 
 Aside from the operatic managers and 
 theatrical agents and general public I had a 
 clientele of over seven thousand, and the man 
 does not live who can afford to ignore the 
 opinion of seven thousand of his fellow beings. 
 On the other hand, the man does not live who 
 can afford to tell his brother to "go to the 
 devil!" If I had ignored my brother's letter, 
 what would have been the result? It is true
 
 153 
 
 I could have explained matters; and had I 
 done so he would, without waiting to hear 
 details, have said, "If that is how you feel, 
 why, of course, fight the thing to a finish." I 
 am well enough acquainted with him to know 
 that that is just what he would have said; but 
 there would have been a but. He advised, 
 I refused; he listened, I explained; and it was 
 all right but (here is where the but comes in) 
 was it all right? There would have been that 
 feeling the feeling of estrangement that 
 time, years of time alone can obliterate. I 
 didn't want any of it; and with the full know- 
 ledge that I should be misrepresented by the 
 press (and I was), and misjudged by my 
 clients (and I was) I, nevertheless, abandoned 
 and relinquished all hope of ever again be- 
 coming a theatrical agent. 
 
 "Blood is thicker than water," and between 
 the multitude and the one, I decided.
 
 JARLD FLAGG 
 
 1920
 
 155 
 
 PART II 
 CHAPTER 10 
 
 Thirty years ago Winter it was cold, 
 biting cold, ears were tingling and overcoats 
 were buttoned tightly. It was early evening. 
 Lights were beginning to flicker in store win- 
 dows when from out the crowded thorough- 
 fare, lower Broadway, a young man turned 
 into Ann Street and walked as a man walks 
 when he knows where he is going and is in a 
 hurry. His hands were jammed deep into his 
 coat pockets; and if any one could have looked 
 inside one of these pockets he would have 
 seen a roll of paper and a hand clutching it 
 tightly. It was not because he thought any 
 person intended to grab the paper but he did 
 not want to lose it. It meant something to 
 him, it represented years of study. It wai 
 manuscript, and it was I Jared Flagg with 
 my manuscript who turned the corner that 
 Winter evening, long ago, on my way to the 
 old-time publishing house of Dick and Fitzger- 
 ald, 1 8 Ann Street, New York City. 
 
 Later that year a book was published en- 
 titled, "How to take money out of Wall 
 Street." 
 
 Now we will go back a few more years. 
 
 At the age of fourteen when living in my 
 native town, New Haven, Connecticut, my 
 step-mother asked me if I wished to continue 
 at the Hopkins Grammar School preparatory 
 to entering Yale College or if I preferred to
 
 156 
 
 go to Wall Street and someday become a 
 speculator. I had heard of Wall Street and 
 longed to know more about it. I had also 
 heard of the Greek language and longed to 
 know less about it; so, without giving the sub- 
 ject consideration, I selected Wall Street. 
 
 Mrs. Work, wife of the late multi-millionaire 
 Wall Street operator, Frank Work, was to 
 make us a visit and it was arranged that when 
 Mrs. Work should return to her home in the 
 great city of New York she was to take me 
 with her. This was forty-seven years ago and 
 I arrived on Wall Street the day of the "Black 
 Friday" gold panic of 1869. Never before 
 had I seen men rushing about in such crazy 
 fashion. At the time I did not know a panic 
 was raging I though it an every day occur- 
 ence and was not favorably impressed, in 
 fact, was depressed and remember and will 
 always remember that day. Everything 
 seemed so strange, a lonely solitary feeling 
 came over me as I stood in the corner out of 
 the way in Mr. Work's office. I thought of 
 our peaceful home in the country, the old barn, 
 the horses, and the small donkey my brother 
 and I owned. I thought of Evergreen Cemetery 
 my Mother I mean my real Mother and 
 my eyes became dim. 
 
 But another day, another year, came and 
 without realizing it I was beginning to acquire 
 an insight into the intricacies of speculation. I 
 was with Mr. Work five years. It was the first 
 and only clerical position I have ever filled. 
 
 Now we will move forward several years. 
 In my book, "How to take money out of Wall 
 Street," I had outlined a method of operating. 
 And after reading in 1907, the words I had 
 written in 1887, it occured to me it might be 
 well to raise a million or two to operate the 
 system.
 
 157 
 
 A man can usually accomplish all he thinks 
 he can, provided: 
 
 First, that he is intelligent enough to see he 
 cannot accomplish it all by his individual effort 
 that he must have the concurrent effort of 
 others and receive a percentage of the profits 
 accruing from the labor of others that the 
 smaller the percentage he exacts the larger 
 will be his profit, because these others to do 
 the real work must have a real incentive to 
 keep at work. 
 
 Second, that he has consideration. Many 
 men are so indifferent as to the rights of others 
 they are always looking for the best of it. 
 This is why they usually get the worst of it. 
 
 Third, that he has patience. Many men are 
 so impatient they strangle every opportunity 
 that comes their way by insisting upon seeing 
 some money each week. This is why they 
 never see much. 
 
 Fourth, that he has dignity. Many men are 
 so lacking in self-respect they will not hesitate 
 to place themselves under obligations to other 
 men. A man who will accept something for 
 nothing amounts to nothing. He is a menial 
 at heart and would, if in a different walk of 
 life, accept a tip. 
 
 Insist upon paying for everything, especially 
 favors it is cheaper. 
 
 Twice in my life, when unable to pay, I was 
 forced into bankruptcy, but each time, "came 
 back" and settled in full although, as the Court 
 records show, was legally relieved from so 
 doing. The most important (the most pro- 
 ductive) bills to pay are those you are not 
 legally obligated to pay. I have always held 
 that a debt could not be out-lawed, could not 
 be cancelled until liquidated, and it is because 
 I have lived up to this doctrine that I have 
 credit without limit.
 
 158 
 
 At this period, 1907, when I decided to re- 
 turn to Wall Street, my office was my bed- 
 room; but this did not deter me from inviting 
 a few friends around to pass an evening. 1 
 told them I wanted to explain how, with 
 money, money could be made by systematically 
 taking advantage of the up and down swings 
 of the market. 
 
 Whenever a person undertakes to exploit an 
 idea not universally understood people doubt; 
 they look wise and poke fun at him. It has 
 been so since time immemorial. 
 
 A system of speculating that will enable the 
 operator to make as much in a declining 
 market as in an advancing one, is not a system 
 universally understood, and my friends at first 
 were not inclined to take me seriously. They 
 thought it too good to be true; but when they 
 realized it was a matter of statistics not words 
 they agreed to back me, to contribute their 
 influence, time and money to aid me in estab- 
 lishing a brokerage firm of which I was to be 
 the head and they (the ten) my special part- 
 ners. 
 
 A few weeks later, January, 1 908, the 
 house of Jared Flagg & Company was founded. 
 
 It soon became apparent that my partners 
 were not elated over our environments. The 
 entrance was faulty, the interior worse and my 
 advice not to be in a hurry, to keep expenses 
 down, transform my bed into a couch, utilize 
 the room as an office, and when necessary 
 lease an adjoining room did not impress them 
 favorably, and I was out-voted ten to one. 
 Class was what they wanted, "a classy office in 
 a classy building," and we got it. We want 
 what we have not got until we get it. Then 
 we want to get rid of it usually. Yet, the 
 "Century Building," 1 West 34th Street, with 
 its marble front looked inviting and the
 
 159 
 
 entrance was faultless. To look prosperous, to 
 look like business, was essential to success 
 they said. So we had letter files, telephones, 
 tickers, private wires, everything everything 
 but business. Business would come later we 
 thought. The next best thing to making 
 money is to think you are going to. 
 
 One morning, six weeks later, after we had 
 quit thinking about our prospects. I walked 
 into the office wearing a high silk hat such as 
 unsuccessful financiers are wont to wear and 
 noticed something about the atmospheric con- 
 dition of the place that did not strike my 
 fancy. I inquired what was up. "Have you 
 seen the Herald?" 
 
 Every one had a Herald page five col- 
 umn one ridicule nothing but ridicule. 
 
 4< Jared Flagg now in high finance," and et 
 cetera. 
 
 Newspaper ridicule effects persons different- 
 ly, adding to or extinguishing the flames of 
 ambition. I am accustomed to it, but my 
 partners after reading this blast acted as if a 
 chemical fire extinguisher had been turned on 
 them. I tried to resuscitate them but they had 
 had enough. The rent would be due in a 
 few days and they had had enough. So, to 
 make a short story shorter the firm of Jared 
 Flagg and Company was by mutual consent 
 dissolved. 
 
 I admire beautiful environments but abomi- 
 nate pretense. A person who professes to be 
 more prosperous than he is in reality may 
 succeed in duping himself but he is the only 
 one deceived. 
 
 There was no pretense about my old ten 
 dollar per month combination office and bed- 
 room and I was once more in it. Come one, 
 come all, I was now ready. The reporters 
 came but their articles produced no more effect
 
 160 
 
 on my customers (and I had a fewl than water 
 on a duck's back. One customer brought an- 
 other and before the end of the first year, 
 1 908, all seven rooms on the top floor of 76 
 Fifth Avenue were occupied by my clerks. 
 
 Occasionally one of my former "classy" 
 partners would drop in and take a look. If 
 he wanted a job he could have one. Those 
 who did not accept executive positions opened 
 speculative accounts. 
 
 In the conduct of my business I made it a 
 rule to give no references, that is, refrained 
 from referring anyone to my friends. If a 
 prospective customer insisted upon knowing a 
 little something about me I would send him to 
 Police Headquarters. Why such customers 
 after calling at 300 Mulberry Street returned 
 and handed money to my cashier is a mystery. 
 
 It may be that there are more upright men 
 on the force than I had imagined. However, 
 one man told me he would not believe a police 
 officer under oath. If he spoke well or other- 
 wise of me it would not affect him. He 
 wanted bank references, $5,000 was $5,000 
 and it was his custom before transacting busi- 
 ness to receive satisfactory bank references. 
 
 "Are you not aware," I inquired," that the 
 worst persons frequently give the best refer- 
 ences that it is part of their profession to 
 have such on tap?" 
 
 No, he did not know it or believe it. A 
 week or two later I sent this "business man" a 
 letter of introduction to the President of the 
 East River National Bank a bank in which I 
 still have and have had an account since 
 February 14th, 1901. Two days later he 
 called and offered me five thousand dollars 
 which I told him to put back in his pocket 
 
 "Before accepting that money" I said, "Let 
 me tell you why the President of the bank
 
 161 
 
 spoke in such high terms of me. After our 
 talk the other day I withdrew from the Union 
 Trust Company forty thousand dollars on 
 which I was receiving two per cent, interest 
 and deposited it in the East River Bank with- 
 out interest. I then turned in my passbook to 
 be balanced. In a few days I called for it 
 and saw that the balance had been brought 
 down and footed in red ink. In years gone 
 by my balance in this bank had not exceeded 
 two dollars. I had kept the account alive by 
 not drawing the last penny. The President 
 did not know me and did not care to know 
 me, but you demanded bank references so I 
 introduced myself. He inquired my business 
 his manner seemed abrupt but I was pre- 
 pared for such a reception I had my pass- 
 book. I told him I was a depositor and 
 handed him my book which he opened in a 
 dilatory way until his eye caught sight of the 
 balance forty-one thousand seven hundred 
 dollars. I was offered a chair a comfortable 
 one I told him I had never overdrawn, had 
 never asked to have my paper discounted and 
 desired no accommodation now. I merely 
 wanted him to know I was conducting a stock 
 brokerage business. "Is that so," he said. 
 "Yes," said I, "and occasionally some business 
 man comes along who wants bank references; 
 and while I may never trouble you, if I should 
 send a prospective customer here, I would 
 like you to say that my dealings with your 
 bank have always proved satisfactory." "Why, 
 certainly, certainly, Mr. Flagg, send them 
 along," he said. "And I sent you." My 
 prospective customer seemed to be in a studious 
 mood. So I continued; "If you care to in- 
 terview a few more presidents give me a little 
 time and I will fix up some A-l references for 
 you."
 
 162 
 
 Instead of five thousand dollars that custom- 
 er, Mr. Edward McVicker, put up ten thousand. 
 
 Nobody loves a hypocrite. Never be afraid 
 to pass out the truth. 
 
 In 1 909, I received a letter from the Union 
 Square Branch of the Corn Exchange Bank 
 requesting me to close my account. 
 
 "What is the matter with it," I asked, "is 
 the balance too large?" 
 
 The manager could not tell. He had re- 
 ceived orders and must obey orders. I left 
 carrying a bundle containing sixty-two thous- 
 and in cash. Not wishing to linger in the 
 streets with so valuable a package I walked 
 across the Square to the Bank of the Metropolis 
 and told the President, whom I had never 
 before met, that I would like to open an 
 account. It may have been that my clothes 
 needed pressing that led him to remark while 
 scrutinizing me that they did not accept ac- 
 counts carrying a balance of less than five 
 hundred dollars. 
 
 "That part will be all right," I said, "as 1 
 rarely deposit less than fifty thousand dollars 
 at a time." 
 
 "Fifty thousand did you say fifty? And 
 what is the name?" 
 
 I told him. 
 
 "Flagg Jared?" He had heard the name 
 somewhere he thought. 
 
 "And to whom can you refer us, Mr. 
 Flagg?" 
 
 "To your neighbor across the park," I said; 
 "The Corn Exchange Bank. They have just 
 kicked my account out it was too good I 
 was carrying too large a balance." 
 
 "And are you willing I should telephone 
 over?" 
 
 "I am referring you to them," I said. 
 
 In less than ten minutes the receiving teller
 
 163 
 
 of the Bank of the Metropolis was at work 
 counting my bundle. And from that day to 
 this my business relations with this Bank have 
 been cordial. 
 
 Later in 1 909 the old Pond's Extract Build- 
 ing was pulled down but it was not until the 
 roof was partly off that I moved into new 
 quarters the Tilden building 1 05 West 40th 
 Street. 
 
 In 1910, the business boomed. To turn half 
 a million dollars' worth of stock in a day was 
 nothing extraordinary. 
 
 In 1911, the business of its own momentum 
 forged ahead even faster. I now had eighty 
 bookkeepers and over seven hundred custom- 
 ers who had made and withdrawn from me in 
 profits almost three quarters of a million dol- 
 lars; and there was no reason why they could 
 not have continued to make money had not a 
 lawless gang of men, ''armed to the teeth," 
 swooped down (September 23d, 1911) and 
 wrecked my office and kidnapped me. 
 
 Because the Government, thinking these men 
 trustwbrthy, had hired them the newspaper 
 reporters took it for granted that it was, and 
 announced it as, a governmental raid, thereby 
 creating a false impression that I was legally 
 raided by the government. 
 
 Why did these men abduct me? 
 
 At the time, 1911, I could not answer this 
 question, nor could I at my trial, three years 
 later. I could surmise but could prove nothing 
 the conspirators would not talk. However, 
 now (1915) I can answer. 
 
 My answer: In 1908, I was in the stock 
 brokerage business. Prior to 1 908, an article 
 had appeared in the New York World to the 
 effect that I had been adjudged guilty of rent- 
 ing flats to immoral persons. As I had been 
 acquitted of this charge (see court records re-
 
 164 
 
 f erred to in Part 1. Chapter3) I instituted a 
 fifty thousand dollar damage suit. This suit 
 dragged along until 1911. It then appeared 
 on the "Calendar" and Ralph Pulitzer and the 
 other owners of the New York World to be 
 forever rid of this suit bribed with money 
 Warren W. Dickson, at that time, .1911, the 
 chief post office inspector of this district to 
 kidnap me and proclaim me as one engaged 
 in a fraudulent business. 
 
 Anything vague about the foregoing answer? 
 Do you think Pulitzer and his puppet, Dickson, 
 understand my English? If so, were it not so, 
 why am I not indicted for libel? 
 
 Mr. Dickson delegated his first deputy post 
 office inspector, Elmer L. Kincaid, to engineer 
 the abduction. 
 
 In an affidavit made by Mr. Kincaid shortly 
 thereafter he stated: 
 
 "The sources of deponent's information are 
 his official investigations to disclose the details 
 of which at this time would be injurious to the 
 government's case." 
 
 That the "details" would have been "injuri- 
 ous" to the government's case had they been 
 "disclosed" can be seen by the following 
 affidavit not made at that time, but made four 
 years later, 1915, at which time Mr. Kincaid 
 having lost his job as a post office inspector 
 could afford to speak the truth. 
 
 "State of New York, 
 
 ss.: 
 County of New York, 
 
 Jared Flagg, a resident of the Borough of 
 Manhattan, New York City, N. Y., with an 
 office at 105 West 40th Street, being duly 
 sworn deposes and says: March 9th, 1915, 
 I called at the office (110 West 40th Street, 
 New York City) of former Post Office In- 
 spector E. L. Kincaid and asked him if he 
 could tell me why the Government raided 
 me? He told me I would not have been
 
 165 
 
 raided had I not instituted a fifty thousand 
 dollar libel suit against the New York World. 
 He said: "This suit of yours had been staved 
 off for years, but a few months before we 
 raided you it appeared on the calendar; your 
 lawyer was pressing it for trial. The World's 
 lawyer," Mr. Kincaid said, "called on Chief 
 Post Office Inspector Warren W. Dickson, 
 showed him the Court Journal in which your 
 impending suit was recorded and told him 
 the New York World wanted your concern 
 raided before your suit was put over on the 
 day calendar as it might then be too late to 
 accomplish their purpose, to be rid of this 
 suit." The World to convince Chief Dickson 
 I was a hard character sent a reporter to the 
 Federal Building with my old 1894 flat in- 
 dictments. Later, according to Mr. Kincaid, 
 Dickson notified the World's lawyer, that as 
 no customer of mine had ever complained 
 he could not make a requisition upon the 
 Government at Washington for funds to de- 
 fray investigating expenses. I would have 
 to be investigated before the raid could be 
 pulled off, otherwise it might look irregular. 
 He said that the World's lawyer agreed to 
 stand the expense; Dickson received cash at 
 various times amounting in all to about one 
 thousand dollars but he gave no receipts. 
 How much went for expenses Mr. Kincaid 
 does not know, but he received no part of 
 the money he says. Furthermore, he says, 
 "The Government did not pay Mrs. Rand," 
 a reporter for the 'World,' "but she reported 
 to us. She furnished us with the names of 
 your brokers. Weeks before the raid we 
 received orders from the World to call on 
 the Presidents of both Stock Exchanges and 
 warn them not to permit their members to 
 do business with you. I called and showed 
 my badge. I also called on your brokers 
 who told me you were conducting business 
 properly." Mr. Kincaid told me that a few 
 days before I was raided the World's law- 
 yer became more insistent; he pounded Chief 
 Dickson's desk with his fist and gave him to 
 understand the World would not stand for 
 another day's delay. "I had no alternative," 
 Mr. Kincaid said, "I received my orders from 
 the Chief and he expected to lead the raid,
 
 166 
 
 but at the last moment decided to go out of 
 town and place everything in my charge." 
 He continued: "You were raided without 
 being investigated, but by having you raided 
 the World accomplished its object. You paid 
 the court fees and cancelled your fifty thou- 
 sand damage suit." 
 
 JARED FLAGG. 
 Subscribed and sworn 
 to before me this 1 9th 
 day of April, 1915, 
 E. H. McCulloch. 
 Notary Public, New York 
 County, No. 2690. 
 Register No. 6062." 
 
 Henry A. Jackson, who was present when 
 I had my interview with Mr. Kincaid, signed a 
 similar affidavit. 
 
 And thus endeth the mystery! 
 
 Remember, I did not know this at the time 
 of my trial, but now know had I not commit- 
 ted this "crime" the "crime" of instituting 
 this libel suit against the New York World I 
 would not have been kidnapped.
 
 167 
 
 CHAPTER II 
 
 To those not having been brought into close 
 touch with humanity this declaration made by 
 this ex-post office inspector may seem startling; 
 but to others, who know something of the frail- 
 ties of human nature, something of the tempta- 
 tions to which men vested with governmental 
 power are exposed, it may not seem so sur- 
 prising. 
 
 It is the desire of most post office inspectors 
 to become great detectives, and most of them 
 possess sagacity sufficient to realize it is not 
 what they do but what the newspapers say 
 they do that leads to promotion. Apparently, 
 their only chance of making a name is in having 
 their names appear in print, "Zealous, self- 
 sacrificing, protectors of the people." 
 
 Did Chief Inspector Dickson surmise that to 
 lead with drawn revolver a spectacular raid on 
 a prominent brokerage establishment might 
 bring his name before the public? Did he en- 
 tertain a lurking impression he might be com- 
 mended by the morning and evening edition* 
 of the World for his shrewdness, bravery and 
 devotion to duty, if in my case he failed to do 
 his duty? And did he apprehend that if in 
 my case he stood out determined not to betray 
 the confidence reposed in him by the people 
 the great Metropolitan Journal, the World, 
 might level its influence at him; might accuse 
 him of unfitness negligence incompetency? 
 Was this why he deemed it wise in my case to 
 violate his oath of office and yield to the de- 
 mands of the New York World's lawyer? Or
 
 168 
 
 was there a reason more potent? Expenses 
 were paid in cash and no receipts given. Why 
 were checks not used or receipts required? 
 Someone, sometime, may have to answer this 
 question. 
 
 Even granting corruption exists in certain 
 departments of our Government many say they 
 cannot see how a newspaper could by adopt- 
 ing this roundabout course hope to escape the 
 consequences of a damage suit. It's unreason- 
 able, they think. And yet for this very reason 
 unreasonable reason this course was adopt- 
 ed. 
 
 To win I knew (and they knew) I would 
 have to show my reputation had been injured. 
 How could I show this if I had no reputation? 
 If indicted by the Government my good repu- 
 tation would be gone. This is why Pulitzer 
 wanted me indicted. That he felt his chances 
 of winning slim had my suit been heard in a 
 court of law before I had been indicted goes 
 without saying. His lawyer undoubtedly toid 
 him he had no case. Three times he changed 
 lawyers. Was it to find an unprincipled one? 
 Some are honest. Not all lawyers are legal- 
 ized blackmailers and licensed thieves it is 
 said. Was it to find one willing to connive with 
 him to evade the law that he changed so often? 
 He knows but won't tell. 
 
 To mislead the people, to make it appear he 
 was actuated by a desire to serve the people 
 he, three days after I was convicted, as per the 
 World, November 18th, 1914, gave himself 
 credit for having instigated the raid which re- 
 sulted (as he published) "in bringing Jared 
 Flagg to justice." As a matter of fact his only 
 desire was to defeat the ends of justice by 
 preventing me from bringing him to justice. 
 
 Dickson and Kincaid timed the abduction 
 to a nicety. The bond clerk takes an outing
 
 169 
 
 Saturday afternoons; so to make it impossible 
 to have bonds accepted until the following 
 Monday they kidnapped me Saturday. Why 
 did they want to keep me under lock and key 
 forty-eight hours? I know, but before the 
 reader can be expected to understand their 
 motive, before he can comprehend the things 
 that transpired during this interval, before he 
 can believe things that seem unbelievable, he 
 must have some conception of the power con- 
 ferred on these officers. A post-office in- 
 spector could with impunity commit almost any 
 crime. He could in broad daylight walk into 
 any office "armed to the teeth" and with a 
 jimmy pry open any American citizen's cash 
 drawer and help himself to its contents. I 
 have had this done to me and the money, one 
 hundred and forty-two dollars, has never been 
 and I do not imagine will ever be returned. 
 This drawer was constructed in one of my 
 Herring-Hall Marvin safes, and it shows the 
 marks of the jimmy, the splintered wood, the 
 lock broken and partially pried off. 
 
 Post-office inspectors in those days, when 
 armed with pistols, were not afraid to help 
 themselves to anything they could lay hands 
 on. I was in the Tombs when they cleaned 
 out my brokerage office but W. F. O'Neill, 
 superintendant of the building, has signed an 
 affidavit stating he saw them fill forty or fifty 
 United States mail bags with my effects and 
 cart them away. 
 
 From my stolen books they compiled a list 
 of customers and turned them over to a law 
 firm. I had not been in the Tombs three 
 hours before Bovie & Wilson, attorneys-at-law, 
 3 Broad Street, New York, had a list of the 
 names and addresses of my customers. 
 
 Saturday evening, September 23d^J91 1, all 
 Sunday and tjie following Monday while I was
 
 170 
 
 in the Tombs powerless to protect myself and 
 kept there for this reason, this firm and their 
 clerks were calling on my customers, urging, 
 begging and advising them to sign a petition 
 to throw me into bankruptcy. To accomplish 
 this only three signatures were necessary. And 
 so eager were the postal authorities to have a 
 receiver appointed they instructed these men 
 to tell my customers that my business was a 
 swindle, that I was in jail and that two 
 customers had already signed whereas not one 
 had signed. 
 
 In a case of this kind when a solvent person 
 has been raided without cause the postal 
 authorities will, if they can with the aid of a 
 tricky law firm, force him into insolvency. 
 Their hidden desire is not only to injure the 
 solvent person's customers and so antagonize 
 them against him but to ruin him financially. 
 If they can do this, leave him without funds 
 to defend himself, to retain lawyers and to 
 defray necessary printing bills to carry his case 
 up on appeal, he will be as helpless as a rabbit 
 in the clutches of a boa-constrictor. 
 
 The impression that before a post-office in- 
 spector could arrest a man it was necessary, 
 because the law so stated, to have some judge 
 sign a warrant was all bosh. Without a war- 
 rant, without evidence of guilt, without the 
 semblance of an investigation I was hand- 
 cuffed, my books ransacked and my property 
 stolen. 
 
 In a small gold frame was a picture of my 
 dead mother. The picture not being con- 
 vertible into cash was torn in two and left on 
 my desk but they stole the gold. Hence, it 
 would seem no crime was too great, too petty, 
 too contemptible, for these inspectors to com- 
 mit. 
 
 The New York World, March 12th, 1912,
 
 171 
 
 quoted Chief Post-office Inspector Dickson, 
 as follows: "Uncle Sam invests us with ample 
 authority. We can go as far as we like, batter 
 down doors and pry open desks." So in ad- 
 dition to my word for it you have this official's 
 word. 
 
 Now, the next few days was there anything 
 doing? 
 
 There was. 
 
 Public sentiment is the strongest influence 
 in the world. Guilty or not guilty no man 
 can stand against it. Newspapers mould senti- 
 ment. Post-office inspectors and government 
 prosecutors know this. And whenever an in- 
 nocent man is marked for conviction those in 
 the plot start a newspaper campaign against 
 him and endeavor in every conceivable way to 
 besmirch his character. If previously the re- 
 cipient of newspaper notoriety it is easy by 
 adding more coals to inflame sentiment against 
 him. So far-reaching, all powerful, is this 
 subtle influence that the battle is won before it 
 begins if the community and press unwittingly 
 are with the conspirators and against the ac- 
 cused person. To turn sentiment against me 
 no stone was left unturned. Government 
 officials gave out interviews and made state- 
 ments knowing them to be false. Chief Dick- 
 son, in a page interview with a Herald reporter, 
 after recording how courageous he was, having 
 "often been under fire when running down 
 safe blowers and yeggmen," added: "The 
 Jared Flagg outfit was about as dangerous as 
 any band I ever tackled." 
 
 How brave was he? What happened at the 
 moment of the raid? I heard no commotion 
 and when I looked up saw a man with a re- 
 volver standing in front of the desk at which 
 I was writing. He blurted out: "You are 
 under arrest." The next moment the place
 
 172 
 
 was alive with detectives and police officers. I 
 have never carried a pistol and it is safe to 
 assume that none of the young women book- 
 keepers were armed. What show would I have 
 had had I attempted to resist being kid- 
 napped? 
 
 There were six doors leading into my office 
 and two officers were stationed at each en- 
 trance. Four guarded my safes. Interest, 
 however, centred in the private office; here 
 there was standing room only. Armed men 
 were behind, in front and on each side of me. 
 As soon as I collected my wits I reached for a 
 telephone but was pounced upon. "Can I 
 not communicate with my brother; I want him 
 to go my bail? " I asked. "You'll get no 
 bail," was the reply. I proceeded to open the 
 humidor intending to light a cigar but the key 
 was snatched from my hand. My handkerchief 
 was in my hip pocket and when I was about 
 to draw it two officers with vise-like grips 
 pinioned my arms behind me thinking I in- 
 tended to pull a gun. When satisfied I was 
 not armed they released their hold and I cas- 
 ually reached for a telephone to call up my 
 lawyer, but was prevented from doing so by 
 an officer with a physique who with an oath 
 said: "What is the matter with you are you 
 looking for trouble?" "What is the use of 
 looking for something I have already found?" 
 I asked. His manner changed, he even went 
 so far as to compliment me, that is, intended 
 it as such when he assured me I was "no piker." 
 "Well," said I, "If I cannot telephone; cannot 
 smoke; cannot even blow my nose, may I eat?" 
 That little word produced its effect. I could 
 eat, but they would have to go with me. Four- 
 teen officers convoyed me to lunch and judging 
 from the bill presented me not a man among 
 them was troubled with indigestion. I took
 
 them to ''Browne's Chop House" and later they 
 took me to the Tombs via the Federal Building. 
 
 Two or three days thereafter Postmaster- 
 General Hitchcock was reported in the Wash- 
 ington and New York papers as having com- 
 mended the Chief and his men for their brav- 
 ery. 
 
 United States Marshall Henkel, October 
 29th, 1911, in a page article in the New York 
 World, knowing no more about the intricacies 
 of a stock broker's business than a coal heaver 
 might know (this is no reflection on the heaver) 
 compared my establishment to a "520 per cent 
 Miller Syndicate." 
 
 First deputy Post-office Inspector Kincaid, 
 six days after the abduction, before I had had 
 an opportunity to say a word in my defense, 
 signed a printed circular carrying with it the 
 authority of the Government and mailed it 
 broadcast over the country proclaiming me a 
 fraud and a swindler. 
 
 With these misleading, lying manifestos em- 
 bedded in the minds of the people from whom 
 my jurors were to be chosen, he and the others 
 sanctimoniously talked abput according me an 
 impartial trial. 
 
 Before the indictment on which I was to be 
 tried had been found, before the Grand Jury 
 had been impaneled the Jury which was to 
 decide whether or no I should be placed on trial 
 these officials to arouse the people against 
 me and incidentally to advertise themselves in- 
 augurated this newspaper campaign in which 
 the aforementioned and many other exquisite- 
 ly illustrated effusions were circulated, not only 
 in all the cities but in many towns and hamlets 
 throughout the country. 
 
 Throw dirt at a man keep throwing it 
 and in time people will begin to think he de- 
 serves it.
 
 174 
 
 Having made it impossible for me to prose- 
 cute successfully the owners of the New York 
 World by illegally arresting me it then became 
 imperative in order to make it all seem straight 
 that an indictment should be found. The 
 people already incited should now be given an 
 opportunity to accuse me of having used the 
 mails with intent to defraud. And to avoid 
 the possibility of a miscarriage of injustice and 
 to make it appear beyond peradventure to be 
 the duty of the people to so accuse me, some- 
 one must be found to appear before the repre- 
 sentatives of the people, the Federal Grand 
 Jurors, and swear I "intended" to defraud 
 him. As no one had been defrauded no 
 customer of mine would complain. It was, 
 therefore, up to Chief Dickson to produce 
 someone who would. His first assistant, Elmer 
 L. Kincaid, suggested Bertha L. Bentley of 
 Corry, Pa., the town from which he (Kincaid) 
 came. She, a life-long friend of his, would 
 accommodate him. He did not like to ask 
 her, he told me so himself, but he had a family 
 to support and his position was at stake. Be- 
 sides, the Chief was his friend. The Chief 
 was in a "tight box," had sold himself to the 
 New York World for money, and he felt it his 
 duty to protect the Chief's incorruptible repu- 
 tation. Whereupon, the dear, good, old soul, 
 Mrs. Bentley, raised her right hand and swore: 
 "So help me God! Jared Flagg 'intended* to 
 rob me." She did not know me, had never 
 seen me, was never in my office, was never 
 asked to send me a dollar, never did send me 
 one, never intended to send me one; and her 
 only reason for taking the oath, she said, was 
 to accommodate her old friend, Elmer. "If 
 I caused anyone any inconvenience I am very 
 sorry" she said. 
 
 Can you beat it? 
 
 The Chief having now performed his duty as
 
 175 
 
 the New York World saw it, Henry A. Wise, 
 at that time United States Attorney, forthwith 
 turned the case over to Assistant United States 
 Attorney, Claude A. Thompson, to prosecute. 
 
 This young man never having had his name 
 prominently before the public was elated over 
 the prospect of distinguishing himself by send- 
 ing a well known man to jail. 
 
 The charge against me was not that I had 
 committed a crime, but that I "intended" to 
 commit one. 
 
 Prosecutor Thompson, by insisting he knew 
 more about my "intentions" than I knew my- 
 self, prevailed upon the authorities in Wash- 
 ington to place at his disposal thousands of 
 dollars with which to work up a case against 
 me. He had no animus against me but this 
 was his first big case, the opportunity of his 
 life, and if by any ruse he could beguile a jury 
 into believing a crime had been contemplated, 
 even if not committed, he would be promoted 
 and applauded as a fearless public prosecutor 
 his future would be assured. It pained him 
 to raise himself up by pulling me down but: 
 "I must do my duty" he said. 
 
 On the eve of the day he was placed in 
 charge of the case, before he had had time even 
 to examine the papers, he wrote to his sister in 
 Tonawanda, N. Y. that he now had the "chance 
 of his life." 
 
 Would an individual capable of being actu- 
 ated by such an ambition be likely for any 
 reason to forego that which he considered to 
 be the opportunity of his life? 
 
 Knowing nothing at that time of his vicious 
 nature I called on him. Eventually I called 
 on officials higher up, but the only satisfaction 
 I received was that the matter would be in- 
 vestigated would be referred back to Mr.
 
 176 
 
 Thompson with instructions to investigate him- 
 self and report the outcome of the investigation 
 to himself. 
 
 Finally, incensed beyond endurance, I wrote 
 and published a pamphlet entitled "The Flagg 
 Raid." In this booklet I told them what I 
 thought of them and their methods of dis- 
 pensing injustice. I also told Thompson what 
 I thought of him and his method of investi- 
 gating himself. And I closed the last chapter 
 by saying: "that if any one of them could 
 show me a dollar ever taken from money be- 
 longing to one customer and sent to another, 
 or if they could show me a dollar ever sent 
 to a customer not honestly made on Wall 
 Street, or if they could point to a bucketed, 
 bogus, fictitious, or crooked entry of any kind 
 on my books from the day I started, January 
 2d, 1 908, down to and including the day of the 
 raid September 23d, 1911, I would go before 
 any judge they might name and plead guilty 
 on the spot." 
 
 Sixty-two thousand copies of this booklet 
 were printed by the Charles Francis Press. 
 A copy was mailed to every lawyer in Greater 
 New York and Washington, D. C. Also to 
 every postmaster,, congressman, senator, and 
 high office holder in the United States. Many 
 copies were sold on news-stands especially at 
 the Park Row Building, in which the offices of 
 Claude A. Thompson were located; and if it 
 was the ambition of this young man's life to 
 convict me before the point of my pen had 
 pricked him can you imagine his aspirations 
 after it had commenced to puncture him? 
 
 "Within thirty days I shall have Flagg eating 
 on tin plates in Atlanta" he said. But my 
 confidence in the people was then, and is now, 
 sublime. I have always found that the people 
 as a whole believe in fair play. And I knew
 
 177 
 
 that when the people knew the truth no jail 
 in this country would be strong enough to hold 
 me.
 
 178 
 
 CHAPTER 12 
 
 Thirty days passed a thousand days passed 
 during which time Prosecutor Thompson 
 poured out the people's money. He engaged 
 several accountants and after they had worked 
 three years on my stolen books making, under 
 his direction, straight entries appear crooked, 
 and after discrediting my most important wit- 
 nesses by having them indicted, and after de- 
 vising and revising one hundred and forty-two 
 lies, as itemized in my "bill of exceptions," he 
 finally felt prepared to trick a jury into render- 
 ing a verdict against me. 
 
 My case forthwith was called for trial and his 
 ambition, my conviction, was achieved. 
 
 In his opening address he informed the jury 
 I had obtained money under false pretenses by 
 misrepresenting my business; and to prove it 
 would place customers of mine on the stand. 
 He did, but instead of testifying against me 
 they testified for me. 
 
 The New York Sun at the time, October 
 23d, 1914, published that the Government 
 witnesses in the Flagg Case proved to be satis- 
 fied customers. The New York American, 
 same date, page 7, column 3, made a similar 
 statement, also other papers. 
 
 But had a thousand testified for me it would 
 have done me no good. I was indicted that 
 settled it that meant, that means, guilt in the 
 minds of judges, jurors and people at large. 
 
 Not one person in a thousand will or can 
 draw a distinction between an indictment and
 
 179 
 
 a conviction. Even intelligent jurors regard 
 an indicted person a guilty person and the 
 word of a person considered guilty carries no 
 weight. An assertion unsupported by evidence 
 when made by a government prosecutor car- 
 ries more weight owing to the prestige of his 
 position than any amount of evidence an in- 
 dicted person can submit, owing to the stigma 
 of his position. 
 
 To discredit testimony that was to be given 
 in my favor Mr. Thompson had ten men in- 
 dicted my ten most important witnesses be- 
 cause they had been associated with me in the 
 business and could of their own personal 
 knowledge swear the entries in my books had 
 been honestly made. When he stigmatized 
 these men, blasted their lives knowing they 
 were honest just as honest as you, the reader, 
 when he filled the lives of their wives, sons and 
 daughters with humiliation, sorrow and tears, 
 he committed in the name of justice a crime 
 tended to fill the souls of decent men and 
 decent women with detestation and horror. 
 
 My lawyer John M. Coleman says: "The 
 crimes committed by Claude A. Thompson and 
 his little hallowed coterie of mercenaries, rep- 
 resenting themselves as the whole United 
 States Government of America, rise mountain 
 high above the crimes charged against Jared 
 Flagg even though he were guilty." 
 
 Before the trial I wrote to Thompson's 
 superior United States Attorney Marshall 
 that these men had had no voice in the 
 management of the business and if any person 
 was to be blamed I alone was that person. 
 
 On the strength of this letter Marshall wrote 
 my lawyer, that he would dispose of the 
 indictments but not until the out-come of my 
 case had been settled. Which in plain English 
 meant that after the indictments had served
 
 180 
 
 their purpose by creating the false impression 
 in the minds of the jurors that my ten most 
 important witnesses were criminals unworthy 
 of belief the indictments would then be 
 quashed. This he did. As soon as I was 
 convicted the make-believe criminal charges 
 preferred against these men were dismissed, 
 as the court records show. 
 
 Would anything so unfair be tolerated at a 
 prizefight, dogfight or cockfight? Hardly I 
 The shining lights of the scum of creation 
 would not stand for it. 
 
 Prosecutor Thompson asserted that the 
 money my customers withdrew as profits did 
 not come out of Wall Street but out of the 
 principal, and that he could prove it; and when 
 he failed to do so, I, believing at the time, as 
 per the law, that the burden of proof rested 
 with the prosecution, did not refute, as I could 
 and should have done, his assertion. I should 
 have said to the jury: Gentlemen, you have 
 heard his assertion. Now I am going to pro- 
 duce witnesses to prove where every dollar of 
 the six hundred and eighty-seven thousand dol- 
 lars my customers withdrew from me came 
 from. I am going to the vitals of this matter; 
 not one dollar is going to be over-looked; I am 
 going to begin at the beginning; I am going to 
 subpoena the exchange member from whom the 
 first lot of stock was purchased, then the ex- 
 change member to whom, at an advanced price, 
 it was subsequently sold the difference be- 
 tween the price paid and price received will 
 show you where the first profit came from 
 Then I am going to call your attention to the 
 next transaction; subpoena the next exchange 
 member, and next, and so on until all the 
 thousands of transactions made by my cus- 
 tomers during the years in which they operated 
 through me have, in the same manner, been
 
 181 
 
 analyzed, verified and sworn to by reputable, 
 disinterested, witnesses New York Stock Ex- 
 change members. It was my "day in court" 
 and had I insisted upon adopting this line of 
 defense I could, in spite of all objections, have 
 forced my acquittal. By relying on the law 
 and closing my side of the case without in this 
 way refuting his assertion I made the mistake 
 of my life he took advantage of my blunder 
 and won out. 
 
 Few appreciate all that it means to a 
 Government prosecutor to win a big case. It 
 means far .more than money. 
 
 Prosecutor Thompson prided himself on be- 
 ing a component part of the Department of 
 Justice, and would be the last one to sell him- 
 self for money the bills might be marked 
 but for promotion, rank, honor and social 
 distinction, he was not only eager to, but did, 
 sell himself body and soul. 
 
 From start to finish he lied-to my jurors 
 knowingly. He appealed to their intelligence 
 expecting to profit by their ignorance, well 
 knowing they were unacquainted with the in- 
 tricacies of financial bookkeeping. If he could 
 flim-flam them into believing me insolvent he 
 knew I would be consigned to a living tomb 
 and he would be awarded laurels galore. 
 Spurred on by this ambition, just as he was 
 closing his final summing up, he stepped for- 
 ward with a roll of paper in his hand and 
 said:- 
 
 "Gentlemen, I have here a statement pre- 
 pared, under my direction, by Government 
 Accountants. It shows the true condition of 
 Flagg's affairs Sept. 23d, 1911, and I want 
 you to take it with you to the jury room, I 
 want you to examine it, ponder over it, and 
 bring in a verdict in accordance with the facts 
 which it reveals."
 
 182 
 
 My lawyer, John M. Coleman, objected on 
 the ground that the statement was absolutely 
 false. "In that it represented the broker, Mr. 
 Flagg, to be the speculator; that it charged up 
 to him the shrinkages in his customers accounts 
 amounting to over five hundred thousand 
 dollars whereas, his customers were respons- 
 ible to him for these shrinkages; that they had 
 put up as margin over one million dollars in 
 cash for the express purpose of protecting him 
 against such shrinkages; that in law, and in 
 equity, and in all justice, Mr. Flagg was only 
 responsible to his customers for their credit 
 balances. Mr. Flagg was not running a bucket- 
 shop or conducting a discretionary pool. He 
 was simply executing signed, specifiic, orders, 
 just as any other stock broker would execute 
 specific orders." 
 
 The Court, assuming the foregoing objec- 
 tions to be immaterial, over-ruled lawyer Cole- 
 man, and allowed the jurors to take the 
 pernicious document to the jury room, and 
 they did. 
 
 Nothing could have been further from the 
 truth than to say this statement showed the 
 true condition of my affairs. 
 
 Part of the truth is often a stupendous lie, 
 and only part of my assets were revealed in 
 this statement. 
 
 Had the members of my jury been im- 
 paneled from members of the Stock Exchange 
 or their clerks or from my own customers, the 
 vicious nature of the statement would have 
 been quickly detected. They would not have 
 wasted hours in "pondering" over a trial 
 balance sheet that debited a stock broker with 
 money he did not get the shrinkages in his 
 customers margins. If that was the lawful 
 way to do it there would not be a solvent com- 
 mission house broker on all Wall Street. But
 
 183 
 
 Thompson, the accredited representative of the 
 people, "got away with it." 
 
 Not one of those twelve men, on my jury, 
 understood the statement to be, or realized 
 that it was, a deliberate fraud, perpetrated by 
 agents of the United States Government, 
 banded together in a conspiracy to deceive 
 them. They knew it simply as a Government 
 Exhibit and thought it honest. And after 
 examining it, and pondering over it for hours, 
 they very naturally brought in a verdict in ac- 
 cordance with the lies which it did not reveal 
 to them. 
 
 "Guilty!" the foreman said. 
 And then what? 
 
 Flowers were placed on Mr. Thompson s 
 desk friends complimented him the "New 
 York World" lauded him the government re- 
 warded him, raised his salary to one hundred 
 dollars per week and promoted him to first 
 assistant United States Attorney of the south- 
 ern district of New York. 
 And then what? 
 Then he was miserable. 
 
 Before and during the trial he seemed de- 
 void of moral sense; but after his triumph the 
 "still small voice" commenced to haunt him; 
 he could not sleep; something must be done. 
 He went to a sanitarium; but there he evidently 
 endured the agonies of the damned; instead of 
 gaining he lost thirty pounds. 
 
 It is too bad he took his "victory" so t3 
 heart. I had no intention of "eating on tin 
 plates," and was not in jail a minute. I was 
 out on bonds. 
 
 Abducted, indicted, tried, convicted, sen- 
 tenced and knocked down in the first round, 
 I was coming back "strong" in the second. 
 This should have eased Mr. Thompson's con- 
 science. In a way it was a consolation to my
 
 184 
 
 jurors who realized when too late that they 
 had been flabbergasted into pronouncing me 
 guilty. To a man they wanted to see their 
 verdict reversed by the higher Court. 
 
 If any person questions this let him com- 
 municate with them. 
 
 Their names and addresses follow: 
 
 Henry J. Barrett 2072 Fifth Ave. 
 
 Wm. H. Warburton 371 West 1 1 7th St. 
 
 John E. Donovan 301 West 46th St. 
 
 E. Nelson Sims 19 East I 98th St. 
 
 E. Stacey Nelson 15 West 38th St. 
 
 Thomas M. Cahill 233 East 23rd St. 
 
 Frank D. Mullen 1 Madison Ave. 
 
 Wm. M. Eurbler 17 Beekman Place 
 
 Joseph Ringler 858 East 169th St. 
 
 Felix F. Wiener 50 Church St. 
 
 Henry Fallerius....4 Travers Harbor Heights 
 
 Charles A. Whipple... 58 West 57th St. 
 
 (all of the City of New York) 
 
 One juror wrote as follows: 
 
 "Dear Mr. Flagg: 
 
 At your trial I was Juror No. 1 2, and 
 voted to convict, but since the trial, have 
 become convinced you are not guilty, and 
 fear I have done you a fearful injustice, and 
 wish to do all I can to correct my mistake. 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 C. A. WHIPPLE" 
 Another Juror, No. 9 Joseph Ringler, wrote: 
 
 x x I was unable to understand the 
 
 great number of figures submitted and so 
 voted to convict." 
 
 This is what is called giving the defendant 
 the benefit of the doubt. 
 
 My customers also wrote. I received over 
 six hundred communications, every one of 
 which is signed and reads as follows: 
 
 "Jared Flagg, 
 
 Despite the fact a jury has adjudged you 
 guilty, I, a customer of yours, still believe 
 you to be innocent. You have not defrauded 
 me and I do not believe you ever intended 
 to do so." 
 
 Do these letters mean anything? 
 
 Do these signatures signify anything ?
 
 185 
 
 To be indicted, convicted and sentenced 
 as a swindler and then to have men rnea 
 who had put up with me in cash over one 
 million dollars to have them the very men 
 whom I was charged with having swindled 
 to have them rise in a body and, over their 
 signatures, make a declaration of this kind 
 does it mean anything? 
 
 If I say it myself, it is the most remarkable 
 tribute, the most magnificent endorsement, a 
 person in my position ever received.
 
 186 
 
 CHAPTER 13. 
 
 No man is beaten until he acknowledges de- 
 feat. I had been "knocked down" but not 
 "out." It took the Government five years to 
 admit this to admit that in my case it had 
 made a mistake. 
 
 Five years after I had been kidnapped the 
 Judges of the United States Circuit Court of 
 Appeals unanimously branded the raid an illeg- 
 al act as follow: 
 
 x x "We prefer to rest our decision upon 
 the broad ground that the Constitutional rights 
 of the defendant," Jared Flagg, "were violated 
 by the unlawful seizure of his books and 
 papers by officers and agents of the United 
 States acting without warrant or pretense of 
 legal authority." 
 
 "The judgment is reversed." 
 
 This reversal did not free me. And any 
 person who says: "Oh, well, he got off on a 
 legal technicality, but he must have done some- 
 thing or the Government would not have 
 raided him," is a coward. He kicks a man 
 when down. Whether through stupidity, sus- 
 picion or maliciousness the result is the same 
 the kick hurts. 
 
 A man who is always suspicious of others 
 gives you a very good line on himself. But 
 who can tell what a stupid person will do to 
 you? He may "put a nail in the coffin" of 
 his best friend and think he has done him a 
 favor. A stupid man is just as dangerous as a 
 malicious one. Some persons imagine they
 
 are doing me a good turn by telling people 1 
 got off on a technicality when I was not off 
 when the Circuit Court Judges did not let me 
 off. They sent my case back to be tried 
 honestly. And pending said trial they held 
 me under bonds fifty thousand dollars all 
 of which is a matter of record. 
 
 Take the record. 
 
 First round: (dishonest trial) Defendant 
 struck "below the belt" 
 
 Second round: (dishonest trial made void) 
 One "knock down" scored by the defense. 
 
 Third round: (indictments dismissed) Prose- 
 cution "knocked out" as will hereinafter be 
 set forth. 
 
 Now, therefore, with a clean bill of health 
 and an unblemished reputation I am once more 
 back in the stock brokerage business. I use 
 the word "unblemished" because my reputa- 
 tion has withstood the acid test of slander 
 without becoming tarnished. 
 
 Thousands have slandered me unintention- 
 ally have insisted that I not only was raided 
 but convicted by the Government. They had 
 read it in the newspapers and thought it true; 
 but there is no truth in it. 
 
 According to the mandate of the United 
 States Circuit Court of Appeals next to the 
 highest in the land do not lose sight of that 
 little fact I never was raided never was 
 tried never was convicted never was sen- 
 tenced. 
 
 My stock brokerage office was not raided 
 by the Government. It was burglarized by 
 officials acting without legal authority and in 
 violation of the law. 
 
 My books were not seized by the Govern- 
 ment, but stolen by officials acting without 
 legal authority and in violation of the law.
 
 188 
 
 I was not arrested by the Government, I 
 was kidnapped by officials acting without 
 legal authority and in violation of the law. 
 
 Because of these unlawful deeds committed 
 by these official brigands, I was in the name of 
 justice heralded throughout the land a fraud 
 and a swindler. 
 
 Because I was, "without warrant, without 
 pretense of legal authority," thus represented 
 all creation sneered at me. But now the 
 Federal Court Judges have reversed all this 
 and have condemned those who had condemn- 
 ed me to suffer. To undergo prolonged sus- 
 pense is to suffer. 
 
 After my abduction in 1911, they kept me 
 waiting three years before bringing the matter 
 to trial; then it took two more years to make 
 them admit it was no trial; and another year 
 before it pleased the United States Attorney 
 to exhonorate me by withdrawing the charges 
 which, from the time they were made, he 
 knew could not be sustained; and which the 
 Chief Post Office Inspector knew were spurious 
 before they were made. 
 
 During all that time, dating from the day 
 that band of armed men dashed into my office 
 and kidnapped me to the day my bail bonds 
 were released six long years prison bars, 
 day and night, Winter and Summer, had 
 loomed before me. 
 
 You, "gentle reader," do not know what 
 that means. It might to a sensitive soul mean 
 nervous prostration he might lie down and 
 die. But not I. My ancestors fought in the 
 Revolution, and no Flagg was ever known to 
 "lie down." 
 
 I do not want to fight. I want to live in 
 peace; but I am an American citizen, and if 
 attacked will give them "all that is coming to 
 them."
 
 189 
 
 Every federal, like every city, official who 
 ever attacked me, whether for money or its 
 equivalent, self-aggrandizement, has either 
 been reprimanded and suspended or requested 
 to resign. 
 
 Police Captain Donohue said I had com- 
 mitted a crime; but was afraid to take the 
 stand and say so under oath. He was repri- 
 manded and suspended. 
 
 Police Captain Price said I had committed 
 a crime, but when invited to step up in court 
 and prove it, tip-toed his way out. He also 
 was reprimanded and suspended. 
 
 License Commissioner Bogart said I had 
 committed a crime, and to prove it produced 
 a forged copy of the court records which I 
 showed to Mayor Gaynor. The very next day 
 at the Mayor's request Bogart resigned. 
 
 First Deputy Assistant Post Office Inspector, 
 Kincaid, said I used the mails with "intent" 
 to defraud. Now he is engaged in the per- 
 fumery business. 
 
 Chief Post Office Inspector, Dickson, said 
 I "intended" to commit a crime, but as he had 
 committed one had accepted a bribe upon 
 request he resigned. 
 
 Assistant United States Attorney, Thomp- 
 son, said even if no crime had been committed 
 that made no difference. It was not what I 
 had, or had not, done, it was what I "intended" 
 doing; and so sure was he that at some future 
 time I "intended" doing wrong, that he in- 
 duced two so-called ''expert government 
 accountants" to commit perjury to convince 
 the court he was right. Now (1917) upon 
 request, he also has retired to civil life. 
 
 It was in this last year, 1917, when I 
 stepped forward for the third round (the trial) 
 that I discovered there was to be no trial. 
 
 If they would have to try me honestly they 
 would not try me at all.
 
 190 
 
 If they were discredited and, therefore, not 
 to be given the benefit of every doubt; and if 
 the burden of proof was not to rest with me, 
 the defendant; and if a new trial would only 
 result in incriminating themselves, why have a 
 trial? 
 
 Whereupon, United States Attorney Marshall 
 fold the court he would not have a trial. He 
 could not try me, he said, because the Circuit 
 Court of Appeals had decreed that my books 
 had been unlawfully seized; and he could not, 
 therefore, use them at a trial to prove guilt. 
 
 But that was not the reason that was only 
 a subterfuge. 
 
 At the very time he made this excuse to 
 the court my books, as per the Chancery Court 
 files, were on public record in a civil case; and 
 could, therefore, have been subpoenaed and 
 lawfully used by him at a trial and he knew it 
 even knew exhibits from his office were 
 being used in this civil case. 
 
 But were this not so; were all the foregoing 
 facts untrue; even then he would not have 
 dared to confront me again in a court of law; 
 because he knew I had, from bitter experience, 
 discovered that the burden of proof rested 
 with the defense, not as the law states with 
 the prosecution. 
 
 I should have expelled should have dis- 
 proved beyond doubt beyond all unreason- 
 able doubt every charge every assertion 
 every insinuation made by the government 
 prosecutors. 
 
 This, they knew I now could, and now 
 would, if granted a new trial, do. 
 
 I would be vindicated. I would have to be 
 vindicated trial or no trial. 
 
 Would they not, therefore, be wiser to 
 vindicate me by withdrawing all charges pend- 
 ing against me, rather than to accord me a
 
 trial by jury which would result in incrimin- 
 ating them and in vindicating me? 
 
 That was the question. The question they 
 would have to determine. 
 
 It would be painfully humiliating but safer 
 for the United States Attorney to do the 
 vindicating quietly, when I was* not around; 
 rather than to have a jury do it, and incident- 
 ally hear my lawyer's voice ringing throughout 
 a court room (filled with newspaper reporters) 
 denouncing, and incriminating, him. 
 
 That, to him to his finer sense of justice - 
 would be repugnant. 
 
 So what did he, the "Honorable" H. 
 Snowden Marshall, do? 
 
 Just after Congress had reprimanded him, 
 and just before he was impelled to pass in his 
 resignation; he sneaked into court without 
 notifying the people the newspapers my 
 lawyer or me; and to let himself down as 
 gently as possible, took back took back as 
 per the following photographic copy of the 
 records every accusation made against me 
 by having every indictment found against 
 me dismissed. 
 
 And such are the "crimes" of 
 
 JARED FLAGG.
 
 DATE DUE 
 
 PRINTED IN U S
 
 A 000 501 301 6