The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-04-15

pany. sold out to Charles Clark. Clark had
previously been employed in the Office as
beokkeeper at a salary of SIS per week.
The witness was offered the property at
the cost of the goods in New York with
it because he did not care to assume the
liabilities He owned some property. The
negotiations for the sale between clark
twenty-four hours. The witness said dur
ing the time he was general manager or
the company IL never purchased 5000 worth
of goods from the Indiana Cabinet Com
pany, of Boston. The company had some
transactions with the United States once
Furniture Company, probably amounting 10
$500 or 2,000. He was asked if he could
tell by looking at the books whether the
company was indebted TO the United States
Office Furniture Company in the sum OF
$5,2l9.13, and answered that he did not have
to look at the books TO say that IL was
not. He then said that his company was
not indebted to the United States company
in the sum of $500 on May 10. 1888; nor 81
162 on July IA; nor 1886 on June 16. No
ever presented to the New York company
for acceptance Some drafts by the cabi-
net company were presented; They were
small drafts and were paid: He said he re-
ceived telegram from the cabinet COM
pany about July Is, 1898. draft for
large amount had been presented to his
company and he had handed it back to the
collector, either saying there were no funds
with which TO pay or that there was some
mistake about IL. The telegram had refer
ence TO this draft. At this point Mr.. Har-
ris said the defense would admit sending
the telegram, and the evidence on that point
was dropped. and the witness was passed
TO the defense for cross-examination.
The cross-examination was conducted by
MT Winter. The witness said an inven .ory
or stock was taken on the day of the sale
by him TO the company. This was put into
the daybook and ledger The books of the
e6nwe Mefe then referred to- and they
valued at, a little over $1,000. The mer-
chandise was appraised at $500. The as
sets at the time of the sale. including
TOOLS. furniture rpcPiVa-
Die wer shown TO be $9,S05.s4. and
the fn bills ooo PssayabIe account was charged
did not know whether these en-
tries were correct or not as he left all
that to the bookkeeper: He supposed the
company was Incorporated in Indianapolis,
and thought 1T had an office here. The in
ventory of the stock taken was shown on
said he thought it was more than that
A report showing the condition of business
was prepared at that time: He was shown
this report and identified it, 1t was to
be sent to headquarters at Indianapolis.
He did not know whether it had been sent
or not On this report among the liabili-
ties was an item for SIG, 223 due the
factory which, the witness said, was for
goods sent by the cabinet company
MORE QUEER FIGURES.
Another item on this statement in the
bills payable account was for $411S1O. The
witness said this represented the amount
due other firms and persons. He said he
supposed this was correct, but did not
know, as the report was made by the book
keeper. The statement showed Sc 460 rs
due the company. The witness thought
this was correct
The redirect examination was then taken
up by District Attorney Burke. He held
the report in his hand and went at the
witness in manner that left no doubt that
there were discrepancies somewhere and
that he was determined TO show them up.
ION this report there Is $5,73S.93 of profit
and loss. charged to the assets is there
not?" asked Mr.. Burke.
Witness-I don't know. You will have to
ask Clark.
Mr.. Burke-No, I want to ask you.
Witness-It is in that column.
Mr.. Burke-Here is item of s5,9S1.50
for furniture and tools. What about that?
that.
Witness-Theres some mistake about
that.
Mr.. Burke-It is charged as assets, is it
Witness-You will have to ask Clark.
The witness said the report was sent to
f. A. Coffin, trustee. and then when asked
how it came TO go TO the trustee he
changed his answer and said 1t was sent
to the cabinet company
Mr.. Burke-Why was 1t addressed to the
Witness-Well, we just sent it there
Mr.. Burke-Then you had no correspond
ence with your own company here ere .,.,,
Witness-We always corresponded with
the cabinet company.
Continuing his answers to questions the
witness said the business was Improbable.
By Mr.. Winter-WaS 1t getting better or
worse?
Witness-Worse all the time.
The witness was then asked If, as gen.
eral manager of the company he knew any
thing. Of $4,000 in acceptances by the com
pany. and he answered tnat ne . qid not lie
This is the amount of acceptances by the
Indianapolis Office Furniture, Company de-
nd I'm hands of
Charles r. Clark the bookl<eeper of the
company, was then called. He said he re-
employed as bookkeeper by the indianapolis
Office Furniture Company. He identified
the books of the company. They were
intended for the Tufts Cabinet Company.
He said it had been intended to incorpor-
ate under TINS name put W ~ NJ. the sta,
70 be the Indianapolis Office Furniture
Company. The witness did not. know that
there ever was a Tufts Cabinet Company.
COFFINS GET THE CASH.
About Aug 1, 1898, p B. Coffin came TO
the office of the company and said the
bank here had failed and he desired to con-
vert into cash the property in the New
York company. He offered to sell to the
witness at 10 per cent. discount and take
thirty-eight notes of the latter in payment,
the notes to be secured by chattel mortgage.
The witness accepted the offer. He gave
notes amounting to $4,000. The notes were
delivered to p. B. Coffin, but made to the
office furniture company. About one month
later he received a notice from Albert C.
Bird of Wall street. saying he had pur-
chased $1,000 of the notes at public auction.
He paid some of the notes held by Bird.
He was asked if he had any instructions
or advice from Mr.. Coffin about conducting
the business after the sale. He answered
not with f. A Coffin. The witness said
about two months after the sale ne asked
Mr.. Coffin's advice as TO what to do, and
was advised 10 sell the property as soon
as possible and turn the proceeds over TO
Mr.. Bird
Mr.. Bird held the first $1,000 of notes. OF
Ind, held $1,000, and the witness did not
know what became of the other 5000
The property realized about IS, coo. He said
goods sent to the New York company were
credited to the cabinet company on the
books of the New York company. He had
never heard of any officers, stockholders
or directors of the company till the time
of the sale to him. He told to refer
on the books of the company to the time
Of the sale by Tufts to the company and
see what was paid to Tufts for the prop
erty. He said the books showed $500 paid
for the good will and $213 for the difference
between the liabilities and assets. These
amounts were paid at different intervals.
He then turned TO page 10 of the book and
disclosed an entry of $685. for furniture,
fixtures and good will The. value of the
try was made about twenty-five days
after the entry of $500 for the good will
at the time of the purchase from Tufts.
The witness said he knew nothing OF these