Omaha daily bee., 1892-11-27
GRACE CHARGED WITH FRAUD
Prominent PrOvidapee Politician and FL
talcier Accused Of Dishonesty.
SEVERAL THOUSAND DOLLARS INVOLVED
How He Was Coritiectcd with the Grant s.
Ward Failure-sued on Notes lie
Nego;tnted for that
Elrm

NBw YoRK, Nov. -. Especial Telegram
TO Tue BEE. Millionaire WI liam II. Gracs,
cX-mayor, merchant prince, anti-snapper aud
leader of various reform movements In the
interest of political purity. is charged with
fraud by the officers OF the American Ma
tional bank of Providence. Tho transactions
involving the accusation date back TO tho
time OF the Grant & Ward failure of 1884,
There were notes negotiated by MIR. Grace
in the bank to the value of $4,000. Suit has
been brought by the bank TO recover the
money OF Mr. Grace with interest to date.
Counsellor Frederick II. Coudcrt represent
ing Mr. Grace, argued a motion before Judge
Truaz in the supreme court today for an or
der directing the pank to make its complaint
more ueiinlte
A paragraph about which particulars were
needed, according to Mr.. Coudert was one
declaring that at the time Mr.. Grace had
his dealings with the bahk he knew from
surrounding facts and circumstances within
MIR. Grace's knowledge at tho time that
ion April 1, 1854 and long before then, Grant
Il Ward were wholly nsolvent and unable
to meet their obligations. They were
oollged to borrow hundreds OF thousands of
collars without collateral security anu to
pay usurions interest, at times at the rate of
from 100 to 300 per cent per year
Where the Money Went.
These loans were used almost exclusively
FOR the payment of prior debts contracted in
like manner, and for declaring fictitious
profits among members of the firm. James
ID. Fitch, who was then a member of tho
firm, was solvent MIR. Grace, it Is alleged.
was Intimately associated in business with
Grant " Ward in April, 1884, and was well
Informed about tho firms affairs. He had
himself taken advantage on many occasions
OF Grant IL Wards necessitous condition and
mad exacted ruinous interest from
tnem receiving more than 100000
in this manner. His pro tits on loans at times
ran up to 300 per cent. Grant & Ward
made five promissorv notes April /, 1854,
dating them March 90, each OF them prom
ising to pay $4,000 to the order of James ID.
Fish July . following, without grace. This
paper was indorsed III blank by Mr.. Fish
and finally reached the hands of Mr. Grace
or his cashier, T.. II. Tobey, upon the pay
ment of Sl9,5OO. In further consideration FOR
the loan the firm signed the following 8gree-
ment: Now York, April /, 1884. In con
sideration OF the sum of 81 and the procur-
ing for us of a loan OF 500, 900 at per cent in
terest per annum on our note due July >,
1884, we hereby agree to take up said notes
, May |, 1884, and pay =. II. Tooey 5000.
GRANT & WARD"
This agreement was eto protect MIR. Grace,
who had an opportunity TO prevent any notes
he might retain inhhlrty days, whereas any
purchaser would have to waitNtwo months
longer a.
"lntending TO defraud the bank" says the
complaint, "Mr. GRACE concealed the truth
and falsely represented to tho bankers that
Grant & Ward were prosperous and solvent
and making moneyout of government con-
tracts, in furtheriug which the money de-
rived from the notes was to be utilized. BY
the facts that he concealed and the fiction
that he spread, he succeeded IN inducing tho
bank to purchase two of the five notes he
had given: For thessse two $4,000 notes he
got $40 000.n ulS