The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1876-10-06

advances were maze, as IS the Gus
tom IN that business. Parties be-
lieved 10 be responsible were al
lowed 10 purchase grain at Buffalo
and other points, paying for
the same with drafts upon
us, which drafts were accompanied
by bills of lading and policies Of
sent TO US for acceptance
and payment.
In the autumn of 1850 we arrang
ed to put in store, aud did put in
store in New York, large amount
of grain so purchased, having an
with our bankers TO
hold the paper of the consignor,
with our endorsement, for 8 grain
market after the close of naViga-
ton, and before its opening IN the
following spring.
This business was the same in
form as that common to such trans
then and now, and involved
no unusual hazard to the consignor,
except in an exceptional derange-
ment of values against which hu-
man foresight is Incompetent to
guard.
The election of Abraham Lincoln
in Noyember of that year was sud-
denly followed by symptoms OF
political uncertainty which soon
ripened into a public fear OF rebel
lion on the part of the South. So
was this result, aud so po-
tent In the impairment of conf
dence. that values were substanti-
ally lost, and business ruin followed
to nearly everyone engaged in the
business of handling produce.
Tho sale of the grain was mine,
and its holding a doubtful expert
ment where the means and credit
of the holder were such as to make
holding thing impossible.
A portion OF our firm favored
the sale, and going into immediate
course, as the sequel
shows, most wise. The balance OF
the firm were hopeful and deter
mined, insisting upon holding for
reaction and advance which they
felt would surely come to their re-
lief.
The result was that Whalen and
Ives retired from the firm, leaving
Hill, Swan and the writer. We
carried through the winter, one OF
the few in New York, closing out
in the spring at severe loss, but
holding reclamation claims against
the shippers fully justifying pru-
dent men in continuing. There
were no reasons for concealiug the
true standing of the firm, nor was
such concealment possible, mas
much as all our transactions were
with banks and bankers jealous for
their own safety and conversant
with all the varying shades of in
dividual credit.
AT this time during the spring of
1861 Mr.. Isaac N. Halliday, whose
appears as a part of said
court records, was employed on his
that he could COM
maud a very large Western trade.
His engagement was for one year.
His statements as to representations
made by me or made by Mr.. Hill
rs to the responsibility and capital
Of the firm are utterly false in eve
~ detail. The business standing
Of the firm was not, so far as l
know, questioned by him or any
)ne else. By consent of the parties
We had single business reference
n New York, the President of the
Atlantic Bank, and do not believe
Mr.. Halliday was ever referred to
him, but was allowed to refer all
Ihippers from whom consignments
we're solicited to this bank.
This place of reference was sole
y from the fact that our deposits
we're there and all our acceptances
made payable there. This bank
lad stood by US through the trials
If the prior year and knew all
bout us. We were not indebted
o it in money or other manner to
induce it to misrepresent our sol
Tency, nor do l believe President
uthworth, of that bank, could
lave been induced to mislead any
me with intention.
During the summer, parties in
lebted to us, and esteemed good,
went into liquidation,
md our claims proved to be a total
oss. Assets esteemed good by
ourselves and our bankers In the
month of April, 1861, proved an ut
or loss before November of that
rear, to an amount far greater than
he liabilities of the firm at the
late of the suspension. The state
nent of Mr.. Halliday in his testi-
nony as to the losses of the firm
Turing the summer of 1861 are Ut
erly false, and were based upon
,uess work or manufactured in
! spirit of malice. He had no &C.
less to the books of the firm.
From the date of the failure of
he firm in 1861 to October 1866,
period of four years, l was contin-
lously a resident of Medina, New
7 ork, and never out of the State ex-
;ept in the military service from
September 1862 to June 1865 and
at home during that pc
Rod on leave of absence.
During this period of four wears
was never charged by Mr.. Halli-
day, by Hughes 81 Lester, or any
human being in legal proceedings,
by written or spoken words, or in
any other form or manner with the
crime set forth in the proceedings
referred to nor in connection with
the transactions of Hill, Anthony
& Go. with the plaintiff in this
case or with any other customer or
creditor of Hill, Anthony Sc Co.
No process of the form of this
one, or of any other form was serv-
ed upon me, although l was there
liable to such service, and where
the laws would make a Judgment
under such form of complaint good
against the body of tho defendant.
l was not only there within easy
reach of each process, but was in
the performance of public duties in
the summer of 1862 as conclusive
against concealment as the position
now held before the people of Kan
sas.
The first intimation received By
me that Hughes s. Lester held me
guilty Of misrepresentation aud
wrong, was found in the complaint,
now published, served upon me in
Kansas in 1867.
Immediately upon such service l
went to Thomas p. Fenlon, an at
torney in the city of Leavenworth,
and stated to him the circumstan-
ces and facts, substantially as herein
and said to him that this
charge of misrepresentation was an
after thought, and used to force me