The Panola weekly star. (Sardis, Miss.) 1882-18??, 1885-04-04
tHt MAniHf 0AHN.
tssiimaaf ~ ismss ~ fish snf usnsfal
ffaaf ~ the Tflst ~ fts fHffasf

fssiiesaS ~ lsmss ~ fish saf usasfsi
bfaHt N ihs ffisi ~ ne fafmsf
FfW foHt Nifrh fa NJ Flah iook
lhe stand, snd Naa stHmIaai a. ~ iba fei
laiI1as hfiwesn ihs bsBs aai me- dfm ~
gmnt Wsfi Ne mIt that ha Gfst
mei tsrilnanl Wsd u 1910 lla
we iHlfudnrrl by Wafds hthof.
lu.Iaw, NJ Greeu, President
~ The mnk wani told flsh
b. wasa young man otllmiied acquhlut
ance and small capital ba. ambltlou' 10
succeed m business. and be- solicited
fishs adyicc ~ tbe same time ward
told Fish that he hal opportunities
through acquaintance 10 speculate prof.
ltnbly IN certificates ui membership In the
Produce Exchange, buying them Tor ego
and selling them ~ from $3.50 "
$3.50 each Fish lent ward money
from time 10 time 10 carry
on these .pccula,lon., aud he siterward
got Fish 10 40 into various schemes
Ward ailerward got acquainted with ".
n Grant ir, and introduced Fish TO him.
The 1fm OF Grant & Ward was formed In
1850. Grant, Ward and Fish each sup
posably contributed 100000 20 the
capital. After this Ward wrote % Fish.
The letters were read In evidence. In
them Ward assures Fish that
no has secured Government
contracts aud expects TO get
larger ones The letters almost lnyafia.
bly, suggest that Fish send certain
amounts 10 aid In working up these In.
yestmcnts Ward also sent Fish each
month a statement OF profits and check
for flshs share, ranging from a few hun.
dreds up 10 sil 900. Many OF the letters
are personal, and speak OF Wards sue.
cess, which he attributes to flsh's giving
him a start lie calls Fish his second
father.
On March %, 1889, Ward wrotei "Thc
general contract business progresses
well, or the papers will give US dts"
Referring 10 a large grain contract he
had taken he writes eve may not be 10
favor long, 40 take these orders when
| can get them. There is TO be a large
order In April, which may try for II you
say so. Now word as TO the
General. II some OF those fellows down
there On Washington who opposed the
| bill for his rotrcmcnt) should get wind
OF our having these contracts they will
use 1t as a tool to defeat the bill, 80 | am
very careful, and have cautioned Smith
against saying anything. As long as we
keep quiet aud do this business Ia out
side names, and In quiet way, the Cen
eral will stick by u.s."
After recess the deposition recently
made by General Grant was put In eyl.
dcncc. In answer TO questions put by
counsel for Mr., Fish, General Grant, ac-
cording to the deposition. said
~ am Informed that was a partner In
the firm OF Grant & Ward at the time the
failure took place. never knew that |
was anything else than special partner.
! have dim recollection of receiving q
letter from Mr.. Fish about July, 1882, aud
OF answering that | had good deal 10
do that day; that II was doubtful
when could 90 aud see him, but that |
believed the matters his firm were en-.
gagged In were all right. The letter OF
which photographs were published | do
not believe was the letter ! answered.
don't suppose ever saw the one that was
published. suppose Mr. Ward took very
good pains that should not have II. |
have searched for the letter did receive,
but am unable 10 find II. have not been
IN the habit Of preserving private letters"
The General was shown another Of the
letters purportlng 10 bc written by
| him. lie said the body oi
the letter was obviously not written by
him. lie did not remember The letter at
all, and could not Identify the signature
as bis, though he was not able 10 say II
was forgery. lie frequently signed
letters when very busy for Mr.. Work
and Mr.. Ward and others connected
with his companies without reading
them. lie might have signed this but
without knowing It's contents.
The direct examination extended only
10 the Identification Of the letters. The
General then made brief statement 10
the effect that al the time he went
into the firm he had very small 10.
come, but had some money that bis son
had managed and added 10 for him
while he was abroad, aud at his sons
suggestion he wcnt into the Arm aud
was to have half his sons share 10
live on. There was hfterward an
income raised for him, and after that the
firm generously concluded TO let him In
as special partner, as he understood.
On efoss-examlnaiIon General Grant
positively denied that the letter from
Fish (the reply 10 which has been photo
gnphed) contained any reference to
Government contracts. lie had told
Ward, when Government contracts were
mentioned, that there must never be any
engaged In. lie had been President OF
the United States, and did not think II
suitable for him 10 have bis name con.
nected with Government contracts.
lie knew there was no large pro.
NJ In them except by dishonest
measures. lie never knew ol
but one Government contract held by the
drm, and Ward told him that consisted
simply In buying 500, 900 bushels Of oats
on the Chicago market. lie saw nothing
wrong In II. Aitcrward he heard rumors
that the iirm had Government contracts
and questioned Ward about Il, but Ward
denied II, and said that he would do moth
Ing TO injure the General. Afterwsrd
Ward, when pushed, explained that III,
firm simply lent money 10 contractors.
General Grant further testified that hs
did not draw out bis alleged tsormonI
profits, but let them lie, except small
amount and hls s25,o00 or $4,000 pei
month. lie lost everything be had 10 The
world by the failure. The Dight befor,
the failure Ward told him they had over
s200, 900 IN securities, and asked him ID
get $4,000 from Mr.. Vanderbilt
which be DID, borrowing II per
sonally. ward told him the dru
was in danger because OF III,
critical condition Of tho Marine Bank
which held $4,000 Of the firms moneT
Mr. Fish never warned him Of overdrsits
aud he did not know that Fish was rails
. ing money for the firm on discounts unti
after the failure.
-
The French Government Denounced.