The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-05-17
IT'S VALUE.
The Defense's Experts Testify About
the Cabinet Plant.

the Cabinet Plant.
Before the Introduction of any evidence
in the bank case yesterday morning Mr..
Miller filed a bill of exception to the ruling
of the court upon the motion of the de-
Tense required the government to elect.
Councilman o. NJ Murphy was then re-
called by the defense. He testified that
five or six weeks ago he made an inven-
tory of the machinery at the cabinet COM
pany's plant and identified the inventory
book in which he made the entries and the
book was introduced in evidence. He
said 1t took about three days to make the
inventory. Ernest Huller testified TO hav-
ing made a copy of the machinery inven-
tory at the request of L. b. Coffin. Albert
Zehring was then called by the defense
and testified that he resided directly oppo-
site the cabinet company's plant and had
been employed by the company for seven
years. He assiste.- in taking the inventory
of July last and identified the inventory
of the stock of the veneer and panel COM
pany, superintendent office, glue room,
sawmill, machine room. pipe shop and
cellar, the engine room and first, second
and third floors. On cross-examination he
said he began his employment as office boy
and was promoted TO assistant to the su-
perintendent.
BY Mr.. Kern-what was the purpose of
taking the inventory in such detail-to
make ii long
Witness-No, sir.
Mr.. Kern then asked if all the property
was in good condition and the witness said
it was.
II see in the inventory here one double
rule pen, you noted all of the pens singly,
did your
Witness-Yes, sir.
Mr.. Kern-Here / see lone beer glass;"
That was In good condition, was it?
Witness-Yes, sir.
Mr.. Remand lone piece of scrap IRON"
That was in good condition. too?
WitnesS-Yes, sir.
Mr.. Kern-That is all.
Frank l.. Reed was then called to the
stand and testified to having copied the
inventories contained in the books pre-
viously introduced in evidence. He identi-
fed a copy of the inventory and was not
cross-examined.
George b. Stoddard. of Chicago, testified
that he was a furniture broker in that
city. He had been in the furniture bust
ness for nineteen years and was for three
years employed as salesman for the cabi-
net company. He organized the Kankakee
Furniture Company, and was for three
handed the copy OF the inventory copied by
f. L. Reed and said IL had been submitted
lining it and had the valuation
placed upon the property. He said he
InOuSnI II NdludllOu was air. II Oull
a few mistakes, probably clerical errors,
some against and some in favor of the COM
pany.
He thought the line of the cabinet COM
pany's wares was the leading one of the
country. He thought the good will of the
cabinet company was worth $4,000; On
derstood to be meant by good will" He
did not know the value Of the patents
Mr.. Burke-You say you are a furniture
broker. How many good wills have you
sold?
The witness said the Kankakee Furniture
Company failed last August.
Mr.. Burke-If a concern had a bonded in
debtness Of $4,000 in, say 1884, and In 1894
this had increased to s25O.0O, would you say
its good will was worth anything?
Witness-Not unless the money had been
used In enlarging and increasing the value
Peter T.. Graves, of Milwaukee, testified
that he had been a chair manufacturer at
Inventories for his company for twelve
years past. He had examined the inven-
tory of the cabinet company of July last
and the valuation of the property contained
i'm it and testified that he thought the val
uation was fair and reasonable on the
whole. He thought the valuation of the
lumber inventoried was low. The standing
OF the cabinet c~ompany's desk was very
high. The witness was then passed to
Mr.. Burke-You think this valuation fair.
do you?
Witness-Yes, sir, and / will tell you
why.
Mr.. Burke-when 1 ask you for a reason
you may give IL.
Witness-All right, sir.
On cross-examination he said he had re-
ceived a general description of the goods
inventoried from +. A. Coffin.
BY the Court-Did you make this esti-
mate upon the value OF the goods to a
going concern or TO a bankrupt concern?
Witness-What they were worth 10 a
Capt. c. H. Tyler, of st. Louis. a re
tired desk dealer of that city, was then
called. He said he had handled the goods
manufactured by the cabinet company
during all the time IL was in business. He
had cleared ST., 600 in his business during
the past seven years. The July inventor
les had been submitted TO him for exami-
nation and he thought the valuation was
very fair to a concern that was then in
operation. He said drawings and patterns
were indispensable and Of great value. He
then explained the meaning OF various
technical terms used In the inventory. Pat
terms not in use are OF no .alue, but may
at any time become of value from a neces-
ssty 10 bring them again into use. He tes-
titled 10 the value and cost OF wood cuts.
He said he regarded the cabinet company
as the first company of its kind in the
country and its wares were second TO none
In the world. He tried 10 buy stock in the
cabinet company both In 1891 and 1892 and