Waterbury evening Democrat., 1891-06-09
WANAMAKER TALKS
The Postmaster General a Will
 ing Witness.
NO DEALING WITH BARDsLEY.
He Was Not an Officer of the Keystone
 Bank.

Before the Failure Ho Had a Million and
 Quarter on Deposit-He Never Bor-
 rOwcd Personally from the Bank-The
 President Says Federal Officers Must
 Explain Their Transactions.
 PHILADELPHIA, June g. Postmaster subcommittee of Councils, that is inves- tigating the affairs of ex-City Treasurer Bardsley, during the day. The knowl- edge that he would appear gave addi- tional interest to the proceedings.
 Mr. Wanamaker being late in arriving at the committee room, the intervening time was occupied in questioning Bank Ex- aminer Drew. While Mir. Drew was tes- tifying MT. Wanamaker arrived, accom- panied by his son and brother.
 At the conclusion of Mir. Drew's testi- timony MT. Wanamaker stepped forward with a roll of manuscript in his hand and stated that he had prepared and pro- posed to read a statement in answer to all the allegations which have connected his name with the Keystone Bank, and giving Q complete account of his transac- tons with that institution.
 Before he began his reading Mr. Wana- maker expressed hope that the commit tee would ask him any questions they de- sired.
 The reading and subsequent question ing occupied an hour, during which time Mr. Wanamaker remained standing When he had finished many persons stepped forward and shook his hand
 Mr. Wanamaker said he had never been an officer of the Keystone Bank, but was simply a depositor. Although his conf- dence in the bank was shaken at the time of the run, he continued to make deposits, and in the five months previous to the failure placed a million and a quarter there.
 q am as anxious" said Mir. Wana- maker, land have as much interest as any other to prevent our city treasury from losing the funds provided by tax payers.
 ''The firm of John Wanamaker, con- sisting of three persons, had an account with the Keystone Bank. On this ac- count the checks of the firm were drawn. The firm account, by arrangement with the bank, was made responsible for Mrs. Wanamaker's checks upon the bank, which, for convenience, were kept in & separate account. It was substantially one account under two heads. Mrs. Wanamaker's account could not be over drawn while the firm account had bal ance to it's credit. Under these circum- stances the account was not overdrawn when the bank closed, according to our books, which show a balance in our favor.
 ''It is true that there was an item that the bank charged against our account at its last settlement month or so before 1t failed of about 5000, which no one at our office knew anything about, and which we refuse to recognize until it is explained. If they are right and we are wrong there would be & small balance against us.
 T never borrowed personally from the bank, except on the one occasion above stated. The paper appearing in my per sonal account was paper received in the course of business, with which 1 settled MT. Lucas indebtedness to me by reason of his having failed to keep his agreement. This was paper received from our custom CTS in the usual course of business for goods sold and delivered.
 "Nor did the bank nor any of the officers ever make any contribution or donation to me of any kind at any time. Inever had business transaction with Mir. Bardsley individually, or as city treas urer, nor with any one representing him in either capacity. Neither had my firm, except that he had small accounts for merchandise at the store payable month ly. never subscribed any money for his benefit at any time"
 MT. Wanamaker further said that he had an agreement with the late John c. Lucas to buy Reading stock. "The agree ment between us was verbal, that MT. Lucas was to personally supply certain deposit the same to my personal account in the Keystone Bank in accordance with that agreement from time to time drew"