New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-05-19
C.P. HUNTINGTON EXAMINED.
TEsTIFYING ABOUT CENTRAL PACIFIC.

THE PURCHASES OF MR.. STEWART AND OTHERS
Mr.. HUNTSGToN's "AssoCIATEs'-MR. cHoArE
POINTS HIS THUMB AT MR.. BANGS.
The trial of the suit brought in the Supreme
Court by David Stewart against Q. z. Huntington, Le
land Stanford Charles Croker and Marx Hopkins 10
recover $4,000 with interest since 1870 the amount
alleged to he due on certain transactions
In Central Pacific Railway stock was con-
tnued yesterday Mr.. Huntington was called
as witness for the defendants He said
that prior the purchase OF the stock in question he
had been for long time bothered and worried by the
plaintiff and others who held investments In Central
Pacific stock In regard to the profits which they mad
hoped for aud had not got At last he could not stand
1t any longer and told them that he would buy their
stock they wanted to sell It, Aftor consultation with
another they decided to SELL The transaction was
absolute SALE After the sale these persons came to
him and kept asking him for some money. They said
that he and his associates had made great deal Oh
money out Central Pacific. and they thought there
should BIO division with them OF the gains. When this
sort Of thing had been going for some time
he told them that he had not bought any stock
for which he had paid more than the plaintiff
and his friends had received, but that II
within the next six months did buy stock at higher
rate would allow the plaintiff and his friends this
higher the stock bought OF them. As matter OF
fact he had never paid more for any Central Pachc
stock than the price paid to the plaintiff.
Choate who directed his efforts for time to learn
ing from Mr. Huntington what he knew concerning the
Contract and Finance Company. by which the Central
Pacific Railway built. Mr. Huntington did not
know positively much about the company beyond the
fact had existed. He did not remember exactly
what his interest In the company had beon nor VINO else
had been interested in It, lie supposed that exGover-
nor Stanford Charles Crocker and his former partner
Mark Hopkins the principal persons interested In
the company but he not absolutely certain OF tbs
lie did not know where he got his Information He had
heard In n general way as people do such thngs lie
got the information much through the atmosphere as
| In any other way.
Mr. Choate-Have you been in politics and did you
| belong TO tho Know Nothing party
Mr. Huntngton-I don't know. may have been
Mr. Huntington said that he bought Central Pacuc
stock he sent 1t on to California He did not Know ex-
| acy what happened to the stock there. lie ala not
know what dividends he had received on the stock HIS
former partner Mark Hopkins acted for him in Cafor-
MA He had left everything entirely to Mr. Hopkins
lie had to confess now, he had often been Obliged to
confess that lie very little about his affairs which
had been managed by Mr. Hopkins. lie had left every
thing Mt Hopkins and had taken his statement Tor
| everything.
The witness further said that the plaintiff Mr Aspin-
wall and others had not TO him. IA ne considered
10 ask him 20 do somehing for them persons asking
| for aims lie thought thIt at first they asked him
to pay them for their stock than they had received
In spirit OF Joking. They kept up this joking 50 long
that last they began TO consider that they actually
had right 10 what they asked for In order to put an
end TO their opportunities no said he would lay tho
matter before his associates. Ho used tho
| term associates In regard to Mr.. stan
ford Mr. Crockcr ami Mr. Hopkins, because that term
VA. constantly used by the plaintiff and his friends lie
DID lay the matter Mr. Stanford and the Others
and they said they did not owe tho plantih and his
friends anything Mr. Huntington said that these mon
were good had formerly boon Interested In the
Central Pacific Railway that perhaps 1t might DO no
harm to do something them. Mr. stanford told ME-
Huntington That he hal nothing 10 do IoG thc'r mem oi,
| II H. Mr. Huntingdon owed them nythlng nc WOulu
| nav then. Mr.. huntington said ho did not owe theIn
| anything. ana let the matter drop. h,o,
/ Nj Chuatc showed Mr Huntington a ltticI ia wnion
the latter had spoken OF his associates, aud asked nun
| whom hc meant " a.,
c5 Mi q and op f@S'' meant Dr. ''1D0 MI
| Mr ChoItc-Arc you good at guessingl
Mr. Iuntngton-l was porn Ia LloHhclu Nouh'J
Coma . ,,.. -,
that Ia had no doubt that Oy hl1 ASSOCIATES NC mea
tue persons named by hun lie c3nld not positively
state how many shares OF Central Paclhc stock he re-
cci,cd when the affairs ot the Contract aud nance
Company were wound up. no DID not think he got
100000 shares To another question ne Said that ne
comb NOT vely state that he had road the answer put
I'm y him H. the complaint mad left that matter to his
Choate called Mr HuntingtOn's attention 10 part OF
the answer and MI Huntington said he Thought that
preston used did not exactly express what htd
meant Mr. CnoAto pressed Tor information =, 20
the Or the answer had bcn pat In al the
suggestion Of Mr Huntington Or his attorney.
Mr bangs objected tllt Mr.. ChDate was pressing hls
| aue.tion too far. and respassnS upon the pIlyi
| l,gcd relations OF counsel and client. .
hir Choate pointed his thumb over MS right shoulder
| in the direction Mr. Bangs and asked: Was n pun
into the answer at tho suggestion oil ths llnsr adu
ing that In h" would not prcss the question
| Mr. Bangs with considerable SHOW oi spirit dccltIol
that both Mr. Choate's question and gesture wore oneh
| siye 49,,
| Mr. ChOate said hs had not dared to point his thumt
| hs other shoulder Mr. COhkhhS was bVtlhB DC
| hind SIR. Choate on the lett , T.,
| M CnOae questioned Mr.. Huntington at leng'h ~
regard To telegram which he had sont to Mr. stanford
advising him 70 settle suit which had been begun IN
| yoying Central Pacific stock. Mr. Huntington sald he
did moi even know positively that suit had been Dc
| gun, and ne did know the nature OF the SUIT
| Mr. Chuate-Tnen you advised settling any suit IN re
gard To Central Pacific without regard to what the
| character OF the suit vast
Mr. HuhtingtOn.-l thOnSht IL better LOT inc cohp1h1
| TO keep out OF litigation.
nfarA