The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1894-09-15

NEW YORK, Seps. - - Ex-Presiiens
Henry Willard OF the Northern Pacific
railroad. who was charged in the report OF
Master in ChSnesry Carey. in the proceed
ings against Recviver Oakes with having
made Unlawful gains in his dealings with
the Northern Pacific Railroad company Is
IN the Orient His eouasel. Wheeler ~
EckhaR made the following statement for
publication in defense Of Mr. Willard Mr..
Peekham said:
The statement in the papers is ealeu.
lated to do Mr.. Willard great laiury. From
a careless reading 1t would be inferred that
ia some legal proceedings conducted IN
tbs ordinary way 10 -aieh Mr.. Willard
was . party. II b. al been sdjgigsd by tie
master thai Mr.. Willard had rssde Illegal
gsins Nothing could be farther frou
the fact In the consolidated suit in the
United States circuits court for the eastern
district ef Wisconsin against the Northern
Pacific company. Thomas r. Cakes. its
ihen president, aud Messrs. Rouse aud
Payne, were, 10y consent OF the railroad
company, appointed receivers.
This inquiry at Milwaukee was not M ada
In order 10 recover anything from Mr..
Vanderbilt and no Judgment or decree OF.
any Kind can be rendered affecting him.
Tue only result that can be effected j. the
removal or retention OF Nc. Cakes as re-
eeiVer.
Had the inquiry been conducted by
counsel with Ihis view only, the report
would have been that IL was not necessary
To decide whether there had been unlawful
gains, etc. by Mr.. Willard or any othse
director, iuasmuch as &c WAS clear Mr.
Cakes neither knew nor ought To have
Known Of such unlawful gains.
The inquiry does not seem 10 have
beet conducted with that view. On tha
contrary, its purpose seems To have been
TO sttsck Mr. Willard. lt was conducted
by the special antagonist Of NJ. Willard.
BrSyton Ives.
Mr.. Petit. the petitioners counsel. puo
before The master the testimony he chose.
SO far as Mr.. Willard was eonceroed there
was no other motive. Mr.. Willard had 40
standing in the proceeding and could not
be heard. Had he volunteered as a wit
ness, he would have been subjected to ex-
animation such IS the counsel chose to
have aud without the aid Of counsel aud
without any control by any court over tho
examination.
Certainly no counsel would allow bis
client to be put In such a position. Now
IS to the charges made Ia the report. eau
only say Mr.. Willard most emphsticslly
denies any unlawful gains and any wrong
doug whatever. The way 10 try whethes
Mr.. Willard Is culpAble or otherwise Is bJ
suit against him, not TO bring In irrelevant
matter on a petition to remove receiver.
''One such suit was brought about
year sgo, nominslly by Que john Swops.
really | understand. by the sans interest
which filed che petition To remove the re-
ceivers. To that suit Mr.. Willard I'm
mediately flied full aud compleVe answer.
The time 90 take testimony hiss long since
expired and the suit has practically boon
abandoned.
AS TO the charges reported by Master
Carey. Mr.. Willard Is quite as ready In
meet them As he was those OF the Swope
case and only after a Judgment In a suit
brought against him aud whers be has
been heard, will 40 Intelligent public give
the matter any consideration.
Now with the testimony taken by Mas
ter Carey. am not familiar. IL was pre-
sented by Mr.. Petit, Mr. Ives counsel.
and am told does not warrant the cOnclu-
zion. The gist of Mr.. Carey's report seems
TO be that in regard 70 the Northern Pzei-
tic and Manitoba railroad alleging Hr.
Willard made profit by reason Of tie uu-
compensation for bis services
and that he made an unreasonable profit,
that Is stated at s363 6l9 30 The question
thus in the mind Of the master seems 20
have been one Of degree. The master con
coded right TO compensation. but says
Mr.. Willard charged too much, and be has
apparently allowed him nothing.
Clearly that is matter OF opiaicD on
which people will differ and on which no
one is competent 10 form al opinion unless
be had facts
81 am told that the items OF cost,
amounting % $40 600. have been over
looked by the master ~ that Ia 50 50
would reducs Mr. Vlllsrd's c0rDpsnsatiot
1ut u the Illegal gains b ts3 90 a.
But - have said, whether the master
1ss drawn correct conclusions frOm ths
est mony submitted 30 him. does not
,esm % me OF the least Importance or
worthy OF the least attention"
Prepare she systsm fDr the approach %