Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-09-18
IVES CROOKEDNESS.
Woodrufps Cross-Examination Com.
pleted-Other Clerks Testify.

In the cross-examination Of Woodruff in the
Ives case in New York yesterday after the re-
| port in The STAR had closed witness said that
Ives suggested to him that he resign his posi-
ton as secretary and treasurer of the Cincin-
natl, Hamilton and Dayton road the day be-
fore the crash on August II, 1888. He COM
| piled.
Speaking of his arrest in Newark the witness
said he did not know why he was arrested for
few days. He came to New York voluntarily.
but did not know that he would be protected
from punishment by confessing to certain
things. He was examined in December, 1888,
| by Judge Harmon, in Cincinnati, in the suit Of
| Albert Meter against Ives q Co. On that oc-
cason he testified in regard to the actions and
talk of Christopher Meyers interest in the
Cincinnati Hamilton and Dayton railroad
| stock.
While witness was in custody at police head
quarters in this city for period of twenty five
days he was only in cell twice, and he was not
| treated like prisoner. While there he agreed
| to make confession.
MIR. Brooke read to the witness portions of
his testimony given in the case Of Christopher
Meyer and Woodruff acknowledged that he
| committed perjury at that trial. These state
ments were taken down by q stenographer at
the time and corrected. Some of them had
been signed by Woodruff. Witness admitted to
MIR. Brooke
THAT HE HAD PERJURED HIMSELF
in the Meter case
District Attorney Fellows promptly protested
against Lawyer Brooke asking Woodruff if he
was to expect immunity from punishment if he
gave evidence against Ives. Col. Fellows said
that nothing emanated from his Office which
could give that impression. Mr.. Brooke then
threatened to put representative of the
district attorneys Office on the stand
A letter dated October II, 1887, from Wood
ruff to Ives, which Mr.. Brooke said would show
the former was not such 4 slave to the latter as
he pretended he was was not admitted in evil
dence. Another letter from Woodruff to Ives
was read, in which Woodruff told his partner
that until he made his compromise" he would
keep out OF the way. This one was dated
February 10, 1889. The witness said ne COM
mitsed perjury under Ives instructions.
Woodruff reiterated what he had sworn to
about Ives tracing Christopher Meyers initials
while holding paper against window pane in
Stayners house The first time this was men,
toned was when Woodruff told the story to As
slstant District Attorney Parker at Police head
quarters. Stayner had told witness. after the
latter had made au unsuccessful attempt to get
bond of $3.50. 900 for the faithful performance
OF his duties that bond was not necessary
Witness received $4,000 per annum and from
S2,0OO to $4,000 from Ives Il Co. He said he
was member Of the Dutch Reformed church
nnlsned the examination OF Woodruff
ROBERT B. SMITH, ONE OF IVES CLERKS,
was sworn. He had worked for Ives since 1886
Part of thai time he was assistant cashier
Witness remembered the purchase in the spring
OF 1886 of a block of Cincinnati, Hamilton and
Dayton stock-6.000 shares. 1t was bought in
Cincinnati and the firm was informed of the
| purchase through broker. After this Ives
and Stayner arrived in the Office and Ives
threw bunch of 5000 certificates ON the desk in
| the cashiers cage with the remark that it was
| part of the control of the road. The witness
noticed that they were all made out in the
| name of Ives employees and some of the GER
tificates showed as high as $50 shares, but the
| majority were for only 100 shares. 1t en-
| tered under date OF June 2l-the day of receipt.
AT the evening session the witness (Smith)
| identified number of certificates and ex-
planned the entries in the stock book. Ives told
witness there was an increase in Cincinnati.
| Hamilton and Dayton stock in 1887. One day
| during that year Ives took from the cashiers
| desk $500 shares and although they were
credited to him on the blotter he never made
| any return for them.
! Cross-examned by Mr.. Brooke: Smith left
| the employ of Ives & Co. on August ii, the day
OF the failure. He admitted that it was a COM
mon thing for other brokers as well as Ives &
! 20. to make out stocks in the names of their
clerks. The stocks handed to him by Ives were
understood to belong to the firm.
| Theodore I. Nevins, late cashier of the firm,
was called. He said his salary as cashier was
$4,000 year. His testimony was similar to
that of Smith. the previous witness. He said
Ives had never asked him to make false entries
and the business o. the firm appeared to be
conducted according to the rules OF the street.
E. s. Steinan, clerk with Kuhn, Loeb & Co.,
| bankers, testified to a loan being made upon
Hilmers, MCGOWAN & Co., of e52 900 sterling
| on $500 shares of Cincinnati. Hamilton and
Dayton stock offered by Ives Co. as collateral.
1t was subsequently transferred in Cincinnati.
| The loan was for sixty days. Kuhn. Loeb q
| Co. had no direct transactions with Ives & Co.,
| and their business was done through another
| house.