Morning herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, 1840-11-02

ssds .ssy .ss4tsS q shs ssssssss "a ga y sd
be On discharged from the bank sometime previous.
will also add that the statement Of Mr.. Cusnman
In the New York American is wrong in its leading
oar issl,ss eo.tsisisg se~e important errors, AID
There was nothing u the evidence adducsd before
the afbitrators deroGatory to you an honorable
man. or in the slightest degree affecting your char
acter for probity. Very respectfully youvs,
JOHN S. GILBERT.
The following is the letter of Mr.. William Nc
Murray, the third arbitor named by II bank and
eePted by my COUNSEL ,., ,o..
Sis:-To your note Of this morning, requesting me
the gr unds of my decision in the OF the
Merchants Exchange Bank against you, reply:
that in April las, was selected by mutual agree
ment between your counsel and that Of the Bsnk to
act as referee in that case-Mr Cushman and Mr.
Gilsert having been previously chosen by the re
before the referees and in the absence OF any ev-
dence your part to the time and amount Of your
depostes, for the reason stated by your counsel
Judge Ingls, that your bank books had been burned
at previous fire, decided against Won. consid-
cred then and that the proof established over
draft, AND netting further, and decided. think
il but justice to add, that one of the principal wit
nessts against you the clerk who commit.e ed the
alleged mistake in the accounts-that there is no.
thing in the TRANSACTION, far il has to my
knowledge, to impeach your character or standing,
unless the charge OF overdraft is so considered
and that il any credit has beea carried to your
count BY mist AXE, there was proof before that
you had any knowledge thereof-the alleged error
not having been detected by the bank or stated to
you till about two years thereafter. So
Yours most respectfully
To FSRSASp, WoeD, ESQ.
Mr.. vermlyea, referred to IN the following state
ments, drawn up at my request by Thos. G. Tai
mage, Esq Is political opponent, and was witness
Questioned upon the score of partality towards my
self
NEW YoRK, Oct. l3, 1910.
called on Mr.. Vermilyea, late cashier Of the
Merchants Exchange Bank, in company with Mr..
Fernando Wood
Nj. w cod asked Mr.. vermilyea il the suit com
mencsd against him by the Merchants Exchange
Bank was not for what the bank considered over
draft.
Mr.. vermilyea stated that il was for an overdraft
occasioned by a mistake made by clerk OF the
bank, some Two years before the claim was made
against MIR. Wood for the amount. That MIR. Wood
was notified Of an overdraft Of about ninety dollars
which he deposited making his &C count good, the
bank admitted The erroneous entry to the credit
of Mr.. Wood, was not discovered until some eigh-
months two years after the former notice Of
overdraft. On the discovery by the bank of this
ror, he (Mr. yermilyea) called on Mr. Wood, who
stated IL could not be the case, and he Mr. Vermi-
1yea) believed Mr.. Wood was laboring under mis-
take AID that he did not intend to wrong the bank
That gentlemen from the other (Whig) party had
called upon him to procure information, whe he be-
lieved 10 be hostile TO Mr. God, that he had dec'I
ed saying any thing to them the subject but stat
ed to them that such u Circumstance should not be
brought up against any gsnfman Iha ne 5slco1a
sidered the whole matter Of accusation improper,
and would not enter into il or be party to it."
THoMAs G.. TALMAGE.
The following CORE . ondence ELECTS the opinion
OF his honor Judge lnglis which also will be free
from the charge Of party bias, his honor ap-
pointed TO Office by Governor Seward
Dear Sir / send yeu the New York American Of
3lst October, 1910, containing a statement, partly
made by ID. A. Cushman, and partly by the editor Of
that paper, upon the subject Of reference between
the Merchants Exchange Bank Of this city, and N.Y.
self Yon will oblige me by stating, as soon az you
can, the views entertained by you in relation to my
conduct in that transaction.
Very respectfully, your obedient servant,
FERSANp) WOOD.
October 81, 1905 p. NJ.
Nov l.t. 1910.
DEAN Srn-I dId not receive your note dated yes
terday afternoon until to-day. had not previously
seen the American of the 3lst ult. Your wish TO
have my views i'm mediately will prevent my going
into exposition Of the whole case in relation to
the transaction to which you allude The statement
Of Mr.. Cushman, as contained in the newspaper,
presents only partial statement Of the case, and
that unjust to You.
1t is true that majority of the referees madea
report finding you indebted in the of 50 li3 80
to the Merchants Exchange Bank. The Bank
tcaded that this Indebtedness from their hav-
ing passed to Your credit, on the 81 Of November,
which belonged to Charles Yates. This position
the bank endeavored to establish by entries in their
books, and by the testimony Of their cashier and
clerks. do not intend ia make any comments, de-
duced frsm examination Of the testimony upon
the correctness OF the majority Of the Referees con
curing in this p sition Of the bank.
Whether the decision Of the referees in truth,
correct not, do not consider TO be the point OF
view in which il Can be deemed that this matter is
Of any Consequence TO the public. The true ques-
ton is, whether you acted in good faith In not pay
ing the alleged cverdraft, when the bank made its
apon demand you!
Twill state some facts that will 20 towards the
clue idaton &c that point il appeared in evidence
that your first deposite with the bank was made in
April, lss6-not in September, 1896, as stated by
Mr.. eastman.
IL also appeared that, in March, 1897 you received
q notice from the bar X that your amount over
drawn 500 80. This notice four months after
the alleged passing your credit by the bank Of the
check for Sl,1j0 o. observe that Mr.. Cushman
in his statement, has entirely omitted all mention Of
this notice; omission certainly OF the most vital
importance in the liberation ofthequestioa oily
good faith in the transaction and tending TO give
the whole Of il entirely different coloring. This
overdrawing was Immediately made good by you,
i ISL your Transaction with the 'aah ceased March
There was also evidence before the referees that at
the end Of the month OF March, 1882 two years after
the first notice Of overdrawing, and two years and
four months after the alleged passing to your credit
Of the check for 40 81. you received the first init
nation certified to by the cashier OF the bank of
tse overdrawipg In relation TO whchthe controversy
arose.
extract from my notes ofthe testimony, the cash.
iers statement Oh .@'s point;
About year ago, (ihe testimony was given April
18th, 1910, had aconversaiit with Mr.. Wood I
suggested to him then that there in the
books. told Mr.. Wood that we had discovered an
in his account with the bank, which brought
him in debt about seventeen hundred and fifty dollas
IL was at Mr.. Woods store. He said the could
be- He said IL could not be he was to the
hank in that sum said il occurred by passing 20 hs
credit check in Albany that belonged to another
dealer He said he had no such cheek for collection
there, but that he owed the bank no money have
had two three conversations with Mr.. Wood. He
had kept account for time previously to Octo
Der 1885 lie did for sometime after not positive
mentioned the amount OF the check TO Mr.. Wood. !
asked him for his bank books and check books. He
ssid they were burnt up in fire. lie appeared TO be
surprised at this statement Of the overdrawing He
rl~a.~ ~ ..k k.(cx n -