Holmes' Own Story: In Which the Alleged Multi-murderer and Arch Conspirator Tells of the Twenty-two Tragic Deaths and Disappearances in Which He Is Said to Be Implicated, With Moyamensing Prison Diary AppendixMudgett, Herman W.
General
Holmes' Own Story: In Which the Alleged Multi-murderer and Arch Conspirator Tells of the Twenty-two Tragic Deaths and Disappearances in Which He Is Said to Be Implicated, With Moyamensing Prison Diary Appendix
Mudgett, Herman W.
Mudgett, Herman W., 1861-1896; Serial murderers -- Illinois -- Chicago -- Biography
I shortly afterwards returned to St. Louis, and, upon entering the
attorney’s office, he said, “Well, I am glad you have come; my partner
had been wishing that you would return.” I said, “Why?” He replied,
“Because he wants to get this matter settled up and get our fee out of
it. You know how close work it was to get the company to believe the
claim was straight, and something may occur to make them change their
minds. But, I said, “Why has he to be considered, even in that event?”
He replied, “Because, in a case as big as this, he will have to be
considered; besides, if it had not been for his letter of introduction
to Superintendent Linden in Philadelphia, the money would not have been
paid.” I then told him that I had not yet seen Mrs. Pitezel, but we
would arrange the settlement when I did so, and I would have her come
in and sign the necessary papers later. “Well,” said he, “what do you
think we should receive?” I said, “I have no idea; you must set your
price, not I.”
He then said, “Well, usually in these insurance cases the attorneys get
fifty per cent. of the claim. I have asked three disinterested lawyers
about it, and they say I ought to have that much, they not knowing it
as a fraudulent claim, which makes it all the worse.”
My answer was, “Well, if it comes to taking $5,000, which, from your
own statement to me, is more money than you ever before earned in your
life, you will have the opportunity to keep the balance as well.”
After some further conversation, he offered to choose an attorney if I
would choose one, and leave the fee to their decision, and with this
understanding I went away to return the next morning. When I returned
he met me with the announcement that his partner would not agree to his
proposition. I then said, “I wish to see him if he is the principal.”
At that time I had never been introduced to him. He left his office in
a few minutes and returned and conducted me into his partner’s private
office. He was seated at his desk, apparently much too busy to leave
his work for so small a matter as the settlement of a $5,000 fee.
Finally he turned upon me and, in an over-bearing, bull-dozing manner,
said, “What is all this trouble about? Don’t you expect to pay your
attorney after you have hired him?” I was angry at his insolent manner,
and at once told him that I would have no words with him. If they
wished to receive $500 for their services (reminding him that had it
not been for my presence in Philadelphia they would not have collected
the claim, as he had shown so very little tact in treating with the
company—so much so that they had been twice upon the point of ordering
him from their offices) then that amount could be deducted, but no
more.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account