The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1883-10-06


a Baltimore newspaper concerning the
compromise in the celebrated Parker
Abrahams cases, the banks and indi-
: i,iuals interested in the matter make
the following statement from their stand
point
| To the Editors Of the Daaly Nc'rs:
GeHtlcmen-1n a recent publication i'll
your paper, under the head of a ''Cele-
brated Case" you gave what purports
to be recital of the facts i'll the htiga-
tion lately settled between number of
the banks and private individuals of this
city on the one side, and Mr.. Woodward
Abrahams on the other.
The statement which you published is
very inaccurate in many particulars, and
was obviously prepared by hand more
than merely friendly to Mr.. Abrahams.
SO far as it's averments relate to others
exception to it, but it contains allega-
tions affecting us, which we think 1t
proper to correct. In speaking of the
settlements of the suits at the rate OF
twenty five cents on the dollar, your
article states that this proposition was
made to Mr.. Abrahams by the holders OF
the disputed paper. This is altogether
inaccurate. The proposal of compromise
was not made to Mr.. Abrahams, but
came from him, and was accepted by the
several plaintiffs, not because their belief
that the signatures were his genuine en-
dorsements had been in the least shaken
by the testimony, but mainly because
they preferred to take twenty-five pei
| cent. of their claims in money rather
| than be the owners, after an expensive
| litigation, of judgments which they
feared they would be unable to collect.
In giving Mr.. Abrahams' reasons fol
making the settlement, you state
amongst other things, that The further
believed that it would be the judgmen,
of the community that the holders of the
paper would not compromise for such q
sum unless they themselves believed
that the endorsements were forged.
Now, Mr.. Abrahams may comfort him
self as much as he pleases by giving out
t. the public what ''hc believes 'tht
Judgment of the community isupon tic
question at issue between him and The
holders of his paper; but with equal op
portrniiies for asccrtaining the scnti
ment of the commercial community upor
this matter, we think we can safely say
that he is ''cntirely mistaken i'll hi:
opinion.
| That there is division Of sentiment i.
undoubtedly true, and it would indeed
be strange if the: e were not, considering
his sworn denial that the signature
were his bu: it is his peculiar misfortune
conviction amongst those most intimate y
| acquainted with the facts, and has es
| pecially not shaken our deliberate belle
that the signatures in dispute were really
WI itten by him.
Had We thought otherwise our duty &c
| ourselves and to the banks which W;
represent would not have permitted us tc
accept anything rAatccer from Mr.. Abra
hams, for in pressing our suits against
him to trial We were not engaged in i'll
improper effort TO make linn responsible
upon endorsements which we believed to
be forged, but to force him to pay the
amounts due us upon endorsement
| which we believed then and do still be-
| tieve to be genuine, and which our banks
discounted mainly upon the faith of his
signature.
We have thought it wise so accept
twenty-five cents, as proposed to US by
him, in the settlement of what was sure
to be most protracted and costly litisa-
ton, but We cannot permit him in his
effort to vindicate himself for his conduct
to place us in the position of taking his
money in payment Of endorsements
which we did not feel thoroughly per-
suaded were his genuine signatures, and
which notwithstanding his reputation
of them, We still believe to be his
CHRISTIAN DEvRIEs, President
The National Bank of Baltimore.
ENoCH PRATT, President
Nat. Farmers & Planters Bank Of BALTIC.
WIN. SCHwARZ, President
German American Bank.
J. \. SPRIGG, President
First National Bank.
J. B. RAMSAY.
ID. ID. MALLORY.
J. TOME, President
Cecil National Bank.