The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1878-02-01
THE ERIE WAR.

MR.. CHARLES L. ArrEnDURY's STATEMENT
HE yoREsHADows RECEIVER JEwErT's DE-
FENCE.
In view OF the recent conviction OF Case and Lam
bort charge OF swearing falsely 10 the condition
OF tho companies OF which they arc officials tho
charge Of perjury made against Mr. Hugh J. Jewett.
OF the Erie Railway, obtains additional ntor-
OF the Erie officials scout tho idea that
Mr. Jewett will ever meet the fate OF tho above men,
toned insurance officials, who arc now anguish-
ing IN jail. AMI they claim that malice
and u dssiro TO annoy tho receiver Is
the only basis for tho charge OF perjury;
but charge pushed, and there IL no doubt that
IL will be, very interesting testimony as to sys
tens OF railroad bookkeeping will DO elected. Mr..
Jswe,t OF course declines to say anything for publ.
cation but the following statement by Mr.. Charles l..
Atterbury, OF counsel Tor Mr. Jcwctt and tho Eric
Railway gives a comprehensive and authoritative ro-
Of case besides foreshadowing what the line
oil detonce Will be.
NIX. ArrERBumy's srArExEXE
Tho charge maue against Mr. Jewett before Judge
Morgan was that IN the annual report TO the state
Engineer OF tho operations OF tho Erie hallway Tor
tho voar ending September 80. 1877, he mad wiliuly
missta.cd:-
: Firs-rhe funded debt
Second-rho floating debt
Tnud-The payment OF interest on tho funded debt
quirements OF tho General Railroad ac II ~ Claimed
that Sir. Jewett has been guilty OF perjury.
Whether this report conforms to the requirements
Of tho statute depends upon tho construction placed
upon It's various clauses In the present case, tho
construction adopted was thEt which most nearly
answered the obvious design oil the act and most
accurately fulfilled It's letter and spirit. The sano
construction is followed the previous reports Of the
Erie Railway Company and, W - believed ny all or
most OF tho other railroad companies IN this State
In answer TO tho charge that Mr. Jewett has mia.
stated the funacd deD II IS suncent to say that In
the report he has gwen accurately the entire prince
pal the funded debt aud has not included tho in
tcrest accrued thereon and remaining unpaid, follow
lnut n rasI mar n llsnnl IN
AS tho charge that tho floating debt has been will
fully missated tho TACT Is that under tho description
OF floating debt Is included only Uans and bills pay
able and the same were SPECIALIZED. Curront iia-
bilities Tor materials, labor &C. &c, being met from
DAY to-day by current recopts were not, aud. by tho
best railroad accountants not rockoncd floating
debt Mr. Jcwott In his report stated correctly what
namely The "loans ana bills payabs'-And IL the
port to DO made anew he could not state other
WISE
with regard to tho last charge-that Mr. Jcwet mis-
stated the payments OF interest tho funded debt
Understanding That the act required tho statement Of
all interest the funded debt payable accruing
within tho year covered by tho report ho iuciudod
interest such debts which accrued during and
chngeable TO tho revenues OF such your, whether
paid or not
The amount Of such interest actually paid was
S7S6673, while the total amount payable was
So S07. 764, and being SO payable was properly re-
turned by him AS 'puyments" OF the Erie hallway
Company for ana during The fiscal year
DISTINCTIONS.
This charge II will thus DO seen, IS that Mr.. Jewett
for the purpose OF deception, intended 10 declare aud
did declare that ne hud pad ABOUT SIoVU wv VI inter-
which no did not puy or tn other words, that ne
mad pau the interest on 900 aud more OF nrst
aud second consolidated mortgage bonds tho notorious
nou-paymcnt ot which OCCASION OF his being
receiver vi The company.
Mr. Jewett not intend to state did he under.
stand that no required 10 state SIMPLY the inter-
est actually paid, but the interest that pay-
able during tho year. What possible motive
could no have hud In falsely stating that
he had actually paid tho interest Oh the
funded debt OF company Of which he
and continues DO receiver because such interest
In arrear und why should no thus formally aud IN tho
most public announces hrs dis0bedience Of tho
orders OF the Supreme Court, which expressly pro.
hiDit tho payment by him OF such intercstY
These cuarges arc made upon the aftdavits or
Charos Barrett and Alexander Robertson (who have
heretofore appeared as Witnesses 10 behalf OF james
McHenry In his attacks upon MI. Jowctt), the Farm
ors' Loan and Trust Company unc Others who repre-
principal bond and share holders vi tho Erie
Railway