The New York herald., 1876-10-10
DUNCAN. SHERMAN & co.
SuETHER ADJOURNED EXAMINATION OF kR.
WILLIAM BUTLER DUNCAN.

ofce in the Bennett Building. 10 undergo the con,nua
sion Of his examination in the bankruptcy proceedings
and though the Register not in his Office a. the
time set down, tho proceedings wero gone on with.
Mr.. Edward \. Brown, OF No Nassau street, con-
Quoted the examination.
Before the nterrogatories were begun Mr.. Duncan
stated that he desired 10 prevent msapprehenson to
make addition his testimony given at the last cx
animation, and add did Lot wish to be under
stood as stating that had other cotton other
than that pledged to Andrew Low; We had large
amount OF cotton also with Barring Bros. Co, IN
Liverpool, under advances"
The questioning then went as tolows:-
"Dia you know Winthrop Sargent during his lifo-
t,mef"
81 did sir; he was my brother.in.law and lawyer
sn this city"
..was he partner of James H. Fay up TO the time
OF his deathsn
81 don'i know"
'wus the lrm of Sargent & Fay tenants Of yours at
No. . Nassau street,"
"winthrop Sargent and James IL. Fay were sub
tenants OF ours at No. . Nassau street,
Question repeated but objected 10 by bankrupt's
counsel as already answered. This and several addi
tional questions put later by examining counsel
being objected to by bankruprs counsel Mr. Brown
exclaimed, 'wcli, there's use in gong on with this
examination until the Register arrives TO pass upon
these questions. shall not go until they are an
swered.n
.sThe questions are objected to-" cooly replied Mr.
Bangs will be replied 10 until their correct
II ruled upon ny proper authority. We are ready
TO answer any proper questions Since you VIII not
60 on my client and will leave" which he ard Mr.
Duncan proceeded 10 do, saying as hc went, I'VE have
waited Tor the Register, and as he has not ar
rived we are not compelled to remain longer" Then
"a
Stokes, tho Registers chief clerk, he said, "is there
any thing to delan any longer, Mr. S,okess" Mr..
Stokes ropned that there was power TO keep his
client, when Mr. Brown asked Mr. Bangs IL he would
allow his client TO remain to respond to some
questions relative TO q different subject from
any Introduced, and thus take up the tmo until
tho Register should appear To rule out the question Oh
jecscd Mr.. Bangs willingly assented TO this propo-
RtiOn, and the nation went on some time alter
Register Ketchum came in and rendered his required
decisions, nearly all OF them being in support OF Mr.
Bangs objections.
The testimony OF chief moment elicted from Mr..
Duncan during the afternoon Is here given.-
The first objection Of bankIupts counsel, mentioned
above, was sustained when examining counsel asked
DID Sargent and Fay, together hire The Offices at No.
Nassau s,reetYu and Mr. Duncan replied ..rhey DID
"Was there such firm Us Sargent X Fay to your
knowledseyn
IL know tha. Sargent and Fay, already mentioned
by NO. did business in the same room which they SUBJ
rcnicd from my firm, but whether u coparInership
existed between them know not"
'Dd Sargent Fay act Us attorneys for your
hrn In any suit?"
"Both Sargent and Fay had acted for my firm in
some small suits placed charge OF or both OF them
ut various times Mr.. sargent did SO up to within
year OF his death, suppose-some time after 1870
aud Mr.. Fay may have some matters in his charge
.You the executor OF Mr.. sargsnt's estate,
were You noty'
81 was F"
"Mr. Fay was your counsel executor, he
nots"
s.Not that l know or Not that l rocollectn
lo vnuh hayo vraco pCl IN ha sub biaci
~ do not
ION the 18th OF May, 1865 did your brother-in-law
and Mr. }. Il Fay occupy the same Offices and do bus
ness under the firm name Of Sargent Fay, at No. o
Nassau street:"
"rloy occupied, believe the samo Offices, or Offices
In the same building at tha. time, but whether as
firm or NOT don't know; another person also occu-
pied the same apartmentsthat IS they have the same
Mr. Brown moved 10 strike out tho last sentence
not responsive to the question, but his motion was
"rease state the date of the decd Of the Nassau
street building from yourself to your father"
Objected 10 for assuming such deed when II has
not Teen proven. Objection sustained.
"Did you convey the Nassau street banking house TO
your father about May, 1867"
Objected to as not tho way TO provo q conveyance.
Objection sustained
"Dld you sign any deed of conveyaaco oftho Nassau
street banking houses Ifso wheny"
Objected to the way prove tho contents OF
any paper which signed. Objection sustained.
.'Did you ovor sign any deed OF the Nassau street
Objected to as not the way 10 provo the contents OF
any doed which witness ever signed Objection sus-
tanned.
..Did you ever convey to anybody-'
Objected 10 not the To prove either the fact of
Conveyance or OF no conveyance, and Tor raising
question law which the witness presumptvely 10 not
nj to pass upon. Objection sustained.
.'Was any conveyance OF that property left In the
custody OF J. IL Fays'
Objected TO putting . legal question to laymnn.
Objection sustained.
conveyance OF that property lett with j. Il. FayY'
Objected to as not calling Tor any act OF this witness
or either oil tho bankrups or without apparently re-
iatng TO any property OF the bankrupts. Objection
overruled.
.'Havc you ever represented, by oath or by verbal
statement, since May IS 1865, that you your firm
was the owner Of that property"
Objected To calling for only hearsay evidence and
ns calling Tor tho contents Of written paper Objec-
lion ovcrrucd
..whaicver statement have made under oath has
my signature attached to 1t In writing 1 have made
NO verbal statement whatever TO Tho effect inquired
about, and have invariably stated the reverse whom
asked Since May IS ls6S, have made oath rcla-
tion to the ownership OF that banking house in
sponsc to some Of the proceedings which havo been
going on during the past year In this city. don't
know that had prior to that"
.Did you make any representation at the tax Office
respecting the ownership OF that property"
III did II was IN writing. am told did mako
such u statement but have not seen it"
'Picase look at these papers now shown you pur-
porting TO be acceptauces drawn by Alexander
Burgess, all dated July II, 1878 each for $4,000 and
accepted on the same day by Duncan, sherman "
Co., and state whether these are acceptances nadc by
your nrm"
objected far the question processes to state
the contents OF the papers. Remainder OF question
answered by, .Unless they are iorgcrcs they are
ceptances made by our frm take 1t for granted they
are not forgericsn
sswho Is this Alexander Burgess?"
.'He is believe, IN business in New York city;
don't know his address,"
"what Was his business in July, 1887"
sHe a clerk IN my employ"
ION July IL 1875, did your hrm owe him anythings"
ssNot that know Of -
Had you returned from Europe at that timer"
shave you any means sf telling me what day OF tho
week tho 18th OF uly came on 7" asked Mr. Duncan.
II have; but you are under examinaton,n replied
Mr.. Brown; and then ho wont on-"well, what is
your answer"
81 returned about that date; either days
before after; think did not return until the 14th,
Shough may be IN error"
s.Abous that time did you or your firm receive
cablegram from Europe, which you asked TO have re-
peated and u was repcatcdY'
81 don't recolcct. II you will recall the substance
Qill endeavor to do so"