National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1884-09-17
BANKER soUIERs BUSINESS.
The Testimony Of His Former Clerk Shows
That It Was Illegal.

Some few weeks since, In the equity cause Of
Sheron c. Crawford and others against J. II.
Squicr Il Co, and JOY II. Smith, assignee, n pc.
tition was filed by Col, A. H. jackson,
solicitor for Gen. II. G. Baukhead, U. s.
army praying the return of his pay account
for the month OF june 1881, which had been
enumerated with the assets of the bank, on the
ground that he had received no consideration
for the same. The chancellor referred the
matter to examiner John A. Clarke to take
| testimony ~ has been taken and returned
| into court, The only witness called was Mr..
Joy II. smith, former clerk in the bank and as
slgnee until the court superseded him by re-
| Ceiyer,
lie states that the principal business of the
Dalk was buying the pay of army olicers in
| way similar to the purchase of Gen. Bank
! heads account. They were paid for in cnsh
by draft, or tho net amount placed to the
credit of the officer selling tho account, and
subject to check the same rs any other de-
post The accounts held by Squier ~ Co.
| were paid by the paymnster of tho DEPART
| ment In which the officer was serving or liv-
| ing by draft upon tho treasurer or assistant
| treasurer Of the United States to the order Of
Squier Il Co, These pay accounts were made
out in duplicate and presented to the paymas-
| ter, who retained thcm and gave his check on
/ the treasurer. The witness further stated
| that pay accounts Of this description had been
| collected by the receiver, Mr. Jesse Ii. Wilson,
| to Whose order the drafts were made payable.
| The security that Squicr & Co. had against the
/ collection of these accounts by the officers
| Themselves was that an army regulation sub
] jCCtedhn officer to court martial TOR duplicat-
/ ing puy accounts. lie also relied on the honor
OF the officers.
! In response to an inquiry as to the authority
| or evidence of authority paymastcTs have to
make the drafts payable to the order of the
| receiver, the witness said that for accounts In.
| dorsed payable to the order of Squicr Il Co.,
the paymaster made drafts payable to the re-
ccivcr upon the filing of Il certified copy of his
/ appointment as such officer. The pay account,
he said, as Il rule, was Endorsed in blank and
| when 80 Endorsed the paymaster paid TO the
| holder indorsing it. In the ease OF Gen. Bank
! head the witness said that the net amount of
| the account was passed to his credit, and he
| drew against his account after this amount had
been so placed. There was something stand.
! ing TO his credit prior to doposlting this &C.
count. but how much the witness did not know.
! The bank discounted the pay account ut Q per
cent The witness declined to answer the
| question: Were you aware of the existence of
q statute and of an army regulation forbidding
the transfer of pay accounts of army onicersY
because he said he did not understand 1t.
Neither did he know that Squier d Co. were
aware of the existence of such statute or reg
ulation. He did not know of any other NOM
Der of the firm of Squier& Co. than J. II. Squier,
but declined to answer whether or not he mad
ever heard of any other member.