The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-05-22

and he said the column marked remit
tances'' in that statement contained the
amounts of foreign paper received from the
London branch on its customers. The
amount of this paper was $,97663 and all
OF the paper was sent to Chicago for coll
lection because there was no market for
foreign paper i'm this civ. He said the
proceeds of this paper was returned by the
checks of the Chicago bank and deposited
give the total deposits in the bank by the
cabinet company during the entire time
or Its existence and stated the amount to
be s.. 29l, lO2O3. He also said that Of the
debt TO the bank S11024f.75 represented in
terest and discount on the transactions.
The witness was Them passed TO cross
examination by Mr.. Burke In answer to
the questions of the district attorney the
witness said he did not know the condition
OF the accounts between the cabinet COM
pany and the Connected companies. He
said he did not know the condition of
these accounts at the time he. drew and ac-
cepted drafts as an officer of the different
companies, although he might have known
at the time by examining the books.
drafts? pNoN
Witness-Yes, sir
did you know the purpose of the drafts
and what was TO be done with them?"
No answer.
81, asked you If you knew what was to
be done with these drafts
Yes, in general way"
What was it?'
They were to be discounted at the
bank"
Then the different drafts had passed be-
tween the cabinet company and CON
nected companies were shown him, among
T 1nen me qraft OF NOV. o. dSs2 upon the
He admitted that at this time the Indian
apolis Office Furniture Company. which
had been substituted for the Tufts COM
pany, was in active operation and had
been for nearly two months, and also that
the Tufts company had never been incor-
porated. The only explanation he offered
for the draft being accepted under the cir
cumstances was that it was mistake.
Most of the drafts constituting the in
debtedness of $4,000 to the bank were
mistakes, were they not?" retorted Mr.
Burke.
you say you knew the purpose of all
these drafts at the time you accepted
them, / believer" was the next question
put to the witness by the district at
torney.
Witness-I can't answer that question
Mr.. Burke-When could you answer II,
or what question can you answer?
Mr.. Winter-We object to this line OF
BY the Court-well, guess the witness
need not answer that question.
The witness was then passed to redirect
brought out in cross-examination was
afterwards renewed by a draft of the
United States company.
Albert S. Reed was then called TO the
witness stand. He was at first examined
upon the book accounts by Mr.. Winter. The
defense first undertook TO show that the
June 16. 1893. amounting to 5,95452 were
drafts upon customers and drawn against
value. This was admitted by the govern
ment and the line OF proof dropped by the
defense. The witness was then turned
over to Lawson NJ. Harvey, who appears
specially for Mr.. Reed in the defense Be-
tinued, NJ. d. Butler. manager Of the West
ern Union Telegraph Company, was called
to the stand and testified that Reed had
been employed by that company for about
ten years and left its service voluntarily.
Reed was then recalled and his examina-
ton continued by Mr.. Harvey. He said his
duties at the cabinet company consisted
In a general supervision of the books and
looking after the drawing OF drafts upo..
customers when their accounts became due
He also had charge of the nay roll of the
of the company in Nav, 1892, and received
one share of stock. upon which he never
received any dividends He instructed
by F. A. Coffin to draw drafts for re-
newals when the old drafts became due
and notice of the fact was received from
the bank. He said overirafts at the bank
were very common and were cause1 by
his inability to make collections as rapidly
as claims ma tured against the company.
The system of London drafts. he said. was
in operation at the time he entered the
employment OF the company. He believed
the company was solvent from information
received from F. A. Coffin. The company
more orders than they could keep no
with He thought the increase in the debt
of the cOmnany was Que 10 tne increase
I'm the facilities of the Germany for the
manufacture Of it's goods. He understood
an effort was being made in London to sell
bonds of the company and received remit
lance Of about 50 500 from there. which he
was told was the proceeds of the sale of
some bonds. and which was deposited In
the bank. He said that about Jan. l, 1893.
Haughey aked him for statement OF the
liabilities and assets OF the company. and
when he reported the request to r A
Coffin the latter gave him the statement
10 give to Haughey. He did so and had
never seen the statement since that time.
He could not remember exactly the ng-
ures of the statement. but thought the as
sets were given at about s79z ZOO and the
liabilities about 100000 less. He did not
know the source Of Information from
which the statement was made but be.
Iieved it to be correct. He testified that
the purpose OF organizing the severai
branches was the same as given by +. A.
Coffin in his testimony. with the exception
ation OF which he knew nothing. He
thought the Tufts Cabinet Company had
been INCORPORATED and knew nothing 10 ne
contrary for several months AFTER me
said both the deposit of 500 0'0 in drafts on
lime 6. 1893. and tha+ Of $4,000 on May 3,
1sa2. were made at F A. Coftins request.
and the drafts were drawn at hts rednes,.
The private memorandum hooks. which
have been introduced In evidence we're
then produced and the witness testified
that the first entries ot all transa ctfons
with the bank were made in them and the
the head esISs of bonds ne had cb-
iected to giving them to Mp. Havs at
first because he did not know the charge
nlving the funds OF the bank and de-
si-Ad TO retain the hooks for his defense
The court then adjourned till 9 O'CLOCK
.his morning when the examination of