New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1885-04-21
MR.. FISH IN COURT AGAIN.
TEsrIFYING IN A MARINE BANK CASE.
A CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT SAID 70 BE FRAUDU-
Irxr-M.s THERE A C0NsPIRACYi

A CERTIFICATE OF DEPOSIT SAID 70 BE FRAUDU-
LENr-wAs THERE A CoNsPIRAcYf
One of the principal witnesses in an action
gro owing out OF his connection with the Marine
National Bank. which was brought to trial In
the Supreme Court yesterday, James ID.
Fish, who was brought from Ludlow Street Jail
to testify. Justice Rufus W. Peckham, Of Albany, pre-
sided. The suit was brought by samuel W. Bingham
and Caroline f. Moulton administrator and admnistra-
trx OF the estate OF George s. Moulton against the Ma
rne National Bank an Walter Johnston "a receiver
TO recover $50 % upon certificate Of deposit al
legged to been issued by the bank Mr. Bingham Is
the cashier OF the wllimantic Comm Bank. The plain
ufs are represented by John r. Dos Passos Robert
Sewell and william s. Wolf, while John L. Develn and
Charles L. Miller appeared for the defendants NO Wiz"
nesses called tbs part OF tho plaintiffs. and the
only evidence submitted by counsel tho fact OF the
appointment Of the plaintiffs administrator and adj
mintratrix OF the OF Mr. Mouon the fact that
demand made for the payment CT the cerdhcate
ofdeposlt and that not paid The certificate was
put In evidence Ths defence Is that this certificate
was issued without consideration that has been paid
and discharged, and that Bingham and Fish conspired
together iueny without the bank having received
any money to issue this certificate of deposit TO en-
able them to t for Bingham to transfer
profit by investing the funds OF the estate In tho Dusi
ness of loan to the firm of Grant * Ward
After unimportant testimony had been given by Mr.
Bingham, Mr.. Fish examined Ho sad: " Mr'
pretty good pro- of the money which 1 had In use ;
that he wanted participate and AXE some profit him.
self ne said that he knew pretty well about II; that he
had informed 1t not necessary to spend any
time particularly not discuss the matter; that ne
wanted to make agreement. and an agreement was
Ole desircd to participate in tho large profits You
we're .kingi AOr In receiving large profits Tor the
use OF mOuty. $780,, -. 49,
Q.-Were the names OF any firms mentioned at the
time I Ayes, sir. Grant IL Ward ,,
On what connection were they mentioned A
Tia the mshey To be used through them.
A check for $50. 900 drawn on the Marine Bank was
shown the witness, who said that his Impression was
that he had received H. Tic amour was placed 10 me
credit of Grant 4 Ward. whose note was received lie
did not know Of anything put with texeeps no'es Vi
Grant Ward. ,,.,
to the credit OF Grant & Wardi Al don't know 80,
Q-Wny did you give q certificate of deposit OF the
Marine National Banki A.-By stipulation with DIT
Q-Ihe bank was not to receive any consideration
A.well. don't know that 1t was T., A..
1t dld not
gel. don't know whether there was any intention III
regard that. IL arrangement b. which IT was
intended to make tn money nsefnl. $500, ~,
A check book brlo tgiug Mr.. Fish was handed him
and he wi asked " November 9 he had discounted
any notes OF Grant & Ward Tor Mr. Bingham: " Yes
sir II appears so he replied. They appear to be- III
mr. handwriting Idol't think can lie deceived upon
that" The witness then went over long list OF items
Ward AT the request OF himself FISH SO per cent
Judge Pcckhan-What was the purpose or Issuing
certhcAo Of deposit for money which you lmnedI1'y
loaned tO Grant Wardl A.-rhe bank received tue
money. IL was immediately loaned to Grant warn.
Mr. Scwell asked the wiiurs. II he ever loaned Grant
TO-" answered Mr. Fish. Beng further questioned by
Mr.. scwr. the witness said that although hr hl heeh
ct Ice dd not consider himself an expert rs TO DOCK
He said also that the certificate IN question was s.ned 20
plnntn and that tue bank had received the sooooo
for when tue certificate had been Issued
The case Will 20 Oh to-day.