The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1891-10-24

decided that the property in question should
be sold. Before this was done witness told
Mr.. j. l.. Ludwig that it would have to be-
| bought in by some one or It could not be SOD
for its full value.
| AsALY.
After the suit had been decided in favor OF
the Ludwigs and the lien established the
| property was sold and bought in by witness
| for $1,000. Little over two months ago he
| sold the property for the same amount 10 nr.
Walleretein. and this was the first money
which lie realized out OF tie estate.
A decree issued in the chancery court was
/ shown on the previous day. which allowed
witness TO check for the money adjudicated
to the Ludwigs. but that money was used to
| make I'D the purchase-mOney Tor the prop
erty in question. TO get 1t out OF litigation
| Up TO that time he had no means OF the Lud-
wigs in his possession Us their administrator
After having been shown tue various notes
| Mr.. Dashiell continued that Mr. Ludwig was
always after money and lad repeatedly urged
him 10 close up the estate as soon as possible.
He then stated the various amounts O. money
which he paid u Mr.. J. l.. Ludwig. On Say
! 49, 1889. he let him have : 200 10y check on
! October A. 1sS9. lie paid him 5000. on March
8. 1880. he paid 800. on April 10. 1890. Mr.
| Ludwig drew on him for tl.0lO. and no
! paid the draft On April 21st he paid hln
| s255.1S on June 5. 1890. $500; on August l..
| 1890, $50. and on April Il. 1891. 700, or
total of 54.742.22. Besides he paid $500 coun-
sci fee to Mr.. Hill Carter for establishing the
lien. During this time he was member OF
the firm of j. Thompson Brown a 90. On
April /, 1891. they dissolved partner ship.
ADVANCED MONEY.
In May. 1889. he had money of his own. of
which he advanced Ludwig : 200, and IN Dc
tober he gave him goo. n the spring OF
1850 he received $3.50 from Ludwig tor
the October loan. He thought he
gave Ludwig in October $50 in money
besides the SOC check but had no
voucher for the amount. In the spring OF 1870
Ludwig wanted : 900 and signed a note for
II 500. which covered the 81 900 for which he
drew on Dashiel, the 1850 note and loan OF
$lO1 In June next Ludwig wanted more
money. but witness then had no money on
hand On Sunday. June 18th. he saw Lud-
wig at Fords Hotel where he was stopping
/ on his bridal tour. Next day OF on Tuesday
next. be called at his Office. where witness
told him that the estate was still tied up and
that there was no way 10 press It. As soon as
matters were in shape q settlement would 70
obtained. lie told Ludwig that 70 obtain
money be would have 10 sign notes, Tor no
could not advance any more money; Lud-
wig then signed the 500 note and that lor
! 81 .25O He also signed several notes in blank
after witness had told him now they would
be used The : $50 note was 10 payment
of the 200 oaned by witness aud the 90
note for the check which he had sent
him before his wedding trip. The $1,000
note he thought was for six months and ma
tured il October, when lt was renewed.
Next spring il was renewed q second time.
Ludwig signed the $500 note when ~ TINS
city on his wedding trip. He then san tnat
later he W uld needauothersl o0O ana witness
later paid his draft for 200 and again he gave
him $3.50. Ludwig signed two notes for S31O
in addition. which were III hight 70 be SUM-
] ofa NJ ha Ia "a
DISSOLVED PARTNERSHIP.
Up to April /. 1891. the time when be dis
solved partnership. witness had Kept de-
tail d account of all the Ludwig notes on the
last page OF what was known As the Ludwig
ledger. which contained the accounts OF the
firm with the several members OF the Ludwlg
family When witness was first arrested.
on August nth. lie went 10 J. i.
Browns Office and asked for that
ledger. Mr. Leroy T.. Brown had then
left the city and the ledger could not be
found He went back TO the Office several
times, but with TO better result. At the time
when witness dissolved partnership Alr. j.
Thompson Brown agreed TO give him access
10 the books OF the firm Mt any time How
ever. he was afterwards refused access. and
especially the Ludwig ledger. and his power
of attorney had disappeared from view.
The statement OF " tness that his present re-
lations with the Browns were very unirendly,
was objected TO by Mr.. smith. but admitted
by the Court who deemed II OF great impor-
lance 70 Mr.. pashiell. lnasmuch rs the Lud-
WIG ledger could not be found.
Witness stated that lie Gls o eft two boxes of
private letters ut Browns Office. which hal
disappeared and the letter from Mr. I'D
wig which he had produced in court he had
accldenty found in his Office among Old pa
pers. The bitter feeling between him and
The Browns had been created about three
months before bis arrest. The first breach
occurred on April 18th.
siGNED THE NOTES.
All the Ludwig notes had been sent 10 him
and returned signed or they had been signed
by him in blank while in the city Witness
stated positively that he had never signed
I.udwigs name t. q note. The proceeds OF
the s 500 note OF April ~ 1881. were given
in renewal Of the first note of that amount
The proceeds Of the $500 note Just
about covered the advanced 26O and
interest dc carried the note from April un-
iii about July. when he sold 1t 10 AlTs. Belle
not. ludwig never complained to him about
the notes nor expressed any suspicion until
the arrest of witness. Tie $500 notes re-
ferred 10 by Mr.. uarles could be explained
from the led er If Ii could be found. lie
thought ih0y were renewals Tor one original
note OF that amount. The $1,000 note dis
counted ly Mr. Wallace was given tor the
SsOO draft and interest and discount.
Mr.. Wallace agreed TO carry, but
as soon as tness was arrested
he demanded payment and received
il on the evening of August 18th. II 1t had
not been for witness arrest and II the l.ud-
wig brothers had agreed among them elves,
the estate would have been settled up long
before this time. Each one Of the two
brothers would have received about -. 900.
He bad oyerpaid j. l.. Ludwig -, lC0, aud tie
latter would have 10 pay him Sl.2OD If be.
witness was % pay the outstanding notes,
amounting TO -. 800. here was
dispute between j. L. and j. A. lud-
wig the latter claiming three ourths Of
the estate. + this claim was correct. }. l..
Ludwig would owe witness 3 400 fthe latter
should have 10 pay the notes Every one Of
the notes was signed By Ludwig. who had
received loan for the same.
When questioned 10y Mr.. Carter witness
stated that the amounts paid by him 70 iud,
wig as mentioned above. were all he could
find in the absence Of the ledger. but thought
it was too small. However, each charge was
covered by a voucher.
as BOOK-KTEPER.
When cross examined by Mr.. Smith wit
ness stated that be WAS b0Ok-keepar for the
firm OF J. Thompson Brown Co. from 1873
until March 1891. He was shown q state
ment OF the ludwig estate. which he sad
was made by him. IL showed balance OF
sl.1 in favor Of tho ludwigs and it was
made in account with J. Thompson Brown a
Go. and not with w. S. Dashiell. The &C
count was made out in part by witness and
only the bottom items were added by some
one else IL showed "A cred. 10 j. l.. Ludwig