The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-09-12

face what page of the old ledger the account cams
from, so that you can take the current ledger
and readily trace back an account through q half
dozen ledgers without using or needing any index
When these books are full and are put away, it
Is not essentially necessary that thero
should be IN index in them, because
each account oa the new ledger refers to this
pre- seeding ledger, by page SO that the current
book Is an index to the books preceding is.
When these books were filed the desiga
was to take fresh printed index and fill it out.
and paste it into the book and put it away in
that shape. In one or two instances the book
keeper carelessly did not fill out the paging of
one or two accounts on the new index that was
pasted into the book, when it was filled: but the
omission was of no consequence because the cur
rent ledger would direct anyone right back TO
those accounts. Now gentlemen. as matter OF
comparison of evidence, want to show you tho
Indiana Banking Company's ledger. I want
you to look at page in this book.
Here is the ledger of the Indiana
Banking Company of 1873 Plaintiffs testify
that they know this stock was bought for the
Indiana Banking Company, and that they knew
all the time that it was bought for their COM
pany; that they appointed one of their partners
to negotiate for and buy it, and yet there is not
a figure, letter line their ledger that
shows any such transaction. Not only that there
is not the scratch of pen or a pencil mark, or
any paper whatever put away in a pigeon-hole.
showing that there was any trust on the part OF
Morrison and Miller i'll the purchase of this
stock John l.. Ketcham swears that even when
they were carrying 1925 600 worth of real estate.
it was carried in the individual names of the
partners. / asked WAS there any book account
kept of itY" mo Sir 'Any declar alton of trust
filed anywhere?" mo sir. How did you keep
lW why, we put the papers in envelope.
and on the back of the envelope we wrote the
name of the real estate and stuck it in q pigeon
hole"
Suppose that while John L. Ketcham held
&c l. a.
shape. without an account on any book in the
Indiana Banking Company anywhere that there
was any such trust-Suppose he had owed you
So, 600, and had died Don't you suppose you
would have held pretty good lien on that real
estate! Don't you suppose they would have had
a very up hill business to get that real estate
away from your lien? If they had come into
court and said this is real estate the
Court would have said, Gentlemen, prove it"
They would have said, 1--WE simply know it Is our
real estate" That does not prove it. Where ia
there ali account Where is there declaration
of any kind showing that the real estate belongs
to the bank! Now. gentlemen, look at page ID
of this ledger of the Indiana Banking Company
| of 1873 Now. gentlemen, there, according to
| John L. Ketchain, is the only sign on any book
| OF the Indiana Banking Company that they
| claimed, or owned. or pretended to own, share
of stock of the First National Bank What is It'll
March 5, 1878, $780, $780," but list NatF is
put down in pencil John Ketcham
says he does not know who wrote
| it, He says he did not and he does
not recognize the handwriting. That is the only
mark on their books for the year 1873 leading to
show that they claimed to own dollar of stock
in the First National Bank. want you to look
at that list NATL" in pencil, and remember
| nobody knows who put it there. There is
trust declaration anywhere; there is scratch
of pen or pencil anywhere else tending to show
that they owned any stock in the First National
Bank, except the legend list Natl in pencil on
this page of the ledger and that, gentlemen Of
the jury, is only put opposite to $50 l50 If the
Indiana Banking Company bought and paid for
this stock, where is the book account of the rest
of the 1892, 000f
Now, you will remember that John L. Ketcham
swore on the witness-stand repeatedly that
thing never is bought until it is paid for. That
is Johns idea. Gentlemen, you will not find
another item in this ledger account of stocks
until away in 1879 Does anybody suppose that
the Indiana Banking Company was buying cap
ital stock of the First National Bank in 1879
from John G. Wright and John G. Newt Is there
any evidence showing any such state Of facts9
Not particle of it, This is the only symptom
of ownership of bank stock to be found on their
| books, this list Natl" in pencil
Now, gentlemen, am ready to compare books
| with the Indiana Banking Company. They
brought "Brotherin-law" Davis here and ex-
| amined him for three days as an expert book
keeper to find fault with the BOOKS of the First
| National Bank They are infinitely better, and
infinitely better kept than any Indiana Banking
Company book that has been produced in this
| case, and you know it Take up any ledger OF
the First National Bank and look at 1t: take
Morrisons and Mler's account as kept on the
First National Bank books There is no such
account in the books of the Indiana Banking
Company. Their names do not appear there at
ALL although these plaintiffs say they were trus-
tees for the firm to the amount of 1892 900. Not
single word to that effect entered upon the
books. When Morrison and Miller signed the
contracts of Feb. Il and %. 1878. they did not
sign as trustees When they signed the note
opiva in ma Of hay nfcirv
trustees, nor when they entered their credits
and opened their account on the First National
books, did they say trustees" once. 1t is
plain, straight Morrison & Miller. as a
firm all the time. 1 will show you, before
get through, that they were firm; that the
Indiana Banking Company knew they were a
firm; that the Indiana Banking Company knew
it did not buy the stock, and knew that 1T had not
any interest in it when it was bought, and If any
of the members of that firm, other than Morrison
and Miller, got an interest i'll it they became
interested in it after Morrison and Miller bought
it. Mr.. Morrisons own handwriting, not only
once, but twice and thrice, proves these facts
Now, in regard to the sworn statement made
by Mr.. McCutcheon. He made that. sworn
statement on the Sth day of January, 1873 which
was for the 2Sth day of December, day twelve
days in the past Mr. McCutcheon, Mr.. New,
Mr.. Wright and Mr.. Lynch all swear to you that
all those statements required by the Comptroller
of the Currency refer to day in the past. For
instance, you are cashier OF a bank. and you get
To-Day q leICer from the OoHptrOlIeF Oh bne Cur
rency directing you to make statement show
ing the condition of the bank on day twenty
days back. Now, is there not every
reason in the world for Mr.. McCutch-
con to make the statement from the face
of his bookf What else has he to make it FRONT
What else can he make it front Banks always
do make these statements from the face of the
books-so the testimony is 1t is statement
required showing the condition of the bank il
was on given day in the past If it were
statement for o-day or for a day in the future,
then there would be possibility of taking into
account things that are wrong on the books, but
what the condition was, other than as shown by
the books. There is another thing; daily
balance sheet of any bank in christendon ever