New-York tribune., 1876-01-31
THE TEN CENT MAN ON The STAND

SOME LIGHT on ruE CHARACTER HE WANTS 300, 900
FoR-aR. TRENoR W. PARKS TESTIMONY on
sArURDAY-THR COUNSEL AND SUPPORTER OF
The MEN WHO WERE RoBBING THE COMPANY IN
WHICH HR WAS DIRECTOR-1HE EXTENT OF
TIE CONFESSIONS EXPORTED FROM HIN.
To the Editor or The Tribune.
SIR: Mr. Trenor w. Park asks from you 800, 900
for damage to his character 1t is natural that
should want to know what his character is really
worth | am a stOckhoder in the Pacific Mail
Company. Its value has enormously depre-
ciated on my hands, and am anxious to know
who has been stealing our money, and who has been
supporting the thieves. believe that your curiosity
about Mr. Parks character and my curiosity about
the pecuniary questions in which l am interested,
may center upon common object. In that belief
ask you to explain to your readers certain points
which fully elucidated in Mr.. Trenor W.
Parks testimony in the Pacific Mail inquiry to-day.
Mr. Park, in answer TO the questions put by the
counsel for the Pacific Mail Company, disclosed the
following facts:
First That he was from the Outset and still con-
tinues the friend wiser and defender Of Stockwel
Second That this friendship arose from the fact
that Stookwell, during the months of March and
May. 1873, paid Mr. Park the aggregate amount of
more than 500, 900, which he was neither legally
or morally bound to pay, but which he generously
volunteered to present TO Mr. Park because the lat
ter had suffered losses in stock purchases 10 that
amount made on The faith Of Mr. StOckwells
pressed opinion.
Third: That these instances Of magnanimity and
liberality had so effectually Parks confidence
and friendship that when tho latter was elected
director of the Pacific Mail Steamship Company in
May, 1873, le, in connection with Mr.. Barlow, Mr..
StOckwells counsel, very Jealous and active in
bringing about a settlement between that Company
and Mr.. Stockwell
Fourth Before taking his seat, however. in the
Board Mr. Park used his influence an outsider
until the Board of Directors had been prevailed
upon TO settle with Stockwcl on the terms proposed
by the latter, and vote had actually been taken
accepting and ratifyng that settlement. Then, TO
wit jan 10, 1874, Mr. Park for the first time voted
as such director.
Fifth At that time Mr. Park did not own share
of that Companys stock. hut the pledged friend
and adviser of Mr.. Stockwc and his ndorscr TO the
amount of $3.50. .0OO yet be assumed the duties and
undertook TO discharge the trusts of director OF
that Company while it was engaged in struggle to
force from the same Stockwcll S1,00OOO0 which he
had embezzlcd from its treasury.
Sirh To such an extent did Park carry his 6evo-
votion to Stockwell that in face of the fact that
new exposures of Stockwell's overdrafts were con
stanty coming to light, no attempt was made to
force him to account, and Mr. Stockwel finally sue
ceeded in leaving the country with the bulk OF his
plunder, Park for some time thereafter continuing
to indorse his paper to a large amount.
Serenh Mr.. Parks excuse for his blind devotion
and fidelity to Mr.. Stockwell that the latter had
explained TO him privately that this overdraft had
been used to buy off an opposition line-and Mr..
Park maintained that he then believed and still
believes Mr.. Stockwells explanation to be correct.
Bnt when his statement before the Congressional
Committee in the Spring of 1874 was shown him. III
which, referring to the same explanations, he SAID
he knew they were false, Mr. Parks countenance
looked decidedly blank.
Fiohh: Mr. Parks ideas of the duties aud response
bilites of a director were certainly novel. lie
maintained that whenever and wherever the inter
ests of Mr. Stockwell of the Panama RailToad-ln
which he had large iIteIests-came before the Pachc
Mail Board he purposely absented himself or re-
Trained from voting, evidently thinking that there
by his duty rs such director was faithfully
DISCHARGED Mr Park ought to know. and may soon
learn TO his cost that is guilt in omission as
well as in commission and that betrayal of trust
is auite as often indicated by iuaction as 10y wrong
action For instance, check for SljOoOO
was discovered representing an amount drawn
from the Panama Railroad for St0ckwcilS
individual use. Then similar amount
WAS returned 10 that Company from the Pacific Mail
treasury under the plea that 1T was loan. when
this discovery was made, how was Park to actf
Stockwell stole it from the Panama Railroad, and
Park as guardian of its treasury. was bound to re-
cover it, But StOckwell was his friend. lie could
not act at his expense. The Panama Railroad To
reimburse itself saddlcd the loss on Pacific Mail.
Park as director of that road bound to recoveri
Here was dilemma indeed. The ties of friendship and
fidelity protected Stockwell-pecuniary interests
protected the Panama treasury-and Iacihc Mail
having no other claim for protection than the naked
moral obi CATION of director, bore the loss III
seems to be time that public opinion should TX l'
estimate of this mode of discharging trust and
that our courts determine and measure the abili-
ties arising therefrom. Yours. LAWYER
! Ne,o York, Jan. %. 1876.