The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-04-13

Nutting mad brought the DOCKS from BOS-
ton was not sufficient authorization of
them but on the assurance of counsel that
1t would be followed by evidence that the
t books Zee d were m those e9 Sf ao fhe BGs &
witness TO testify from them. The witness
was then questioned by Mr.. Winter as to
In answer TO questions he said he had
examined the ledger of the Boston COM
pany and compared 1t with the books of
BY Mr.. Winter-"When the Boston COM
pany gave an acceptance it would appear
on the 5 RayaPbe b BOOK H sbopd w0Ia annear IL in
the ledger also"
Mr.. Winter again objected TO the testi--
mony, saying he thought the witness had
failed to show such an examination of the
books as would entitle him to testify to
their contents. The testimony was per-
mitted TO come In by Judge Baker, and the
witness answered that there was no entry
on the books OF the Boston company
lating to any of these drafts which consti-
8, 1888 pa " '''e ''''''' '''
The books of the Wooten Desk Company,
of Richmond. were then produced, and the
witness asked if he had examined them.
Ee answered that he had. Mr.. Winter
asked him II he had examined the bills pay
able book of this company, and upon re-
ceiving a negative answer made the same
objection TO the testimony from these books
as had been urged against that from the
Boston company'S books. The objection was
overruled. The witness was then asked if
the books of the Wooten company showed
& gons eRg to make m the 70 deps ep ff Of @ grants nd
answered that there was no entry of this
kind upon the books. He said he had
amined the ledger of the Wooten company
carefully, examining both the bills payable
account and the Indianapolis Cabinet Com
panys account on this ledger and nowhere
did he find any entry relating to the drafts
on the Wooten company and constituting
a part of the $4,000 deposited by the cab
met company on May g. 1893.
The books of the Boston copmany were
again brought forward and the witness
opened them to the bills payable and bills
know whether he had examined these uae Hce acl
counts before or not; he said the bills pay
able account showed no entry whatever re-
the $4,000 q part u
AT this point the witness was interrupted
by Mr.. Winter who asked If the ledger did
not simply give the figures without any de-
scription by which the witness could tell
what particular transaction was referred
to. and that he would have to refer to the
journal TO tell what the transaction was
except that by the time and amount given
on the ledger he could infer what the trans
action was. The witness said such was the
case He sald the last entry on the bills
payable account was maze on Feb. %. when
there were three entries, as follows: "s244,
S135, S46.55."
Then the books of the indianapolis Office
Furniture Company. of New York, were
brought forward The witness said he had
examined them and found no reference on
them to any OF the drafts constituting
part of the $44, 00O He said he had exam
ined the account of the Indianapolis Cabi-
net Company on these books, but was not
certain whether he examined any other ac-
count or not. He then turned to the bills
payable account and examined It. and was
asked what It showed in relation to the
drafts, and answered that there was no
reference to the drafts on this account He
said he had made no examination of the
bills payable books of this company. He
was then handed the individual ledger of
the New York company and the bills pay
able book, and, after examining them, said
neither of them contained any reference to
the drafts in question. The witness was
then handed e % the notes and bills payable,
not show what ii was, but after cOmpar-
ison with the ledger of the same company
This was objected to by Mr.. Winter, who
said he thought the witness should not be
permitted to testify unless he could identify
the book from his personal knowledge
There was a brief consultation between the
counsel in the case and Judge Baker. after
which the cQurt anEounced tlat the witness
might testify as 20 what the book purported
TO be, and instructed the jury that because
the book purported to be q certain book it
was not to accept 1t as such book until it
was proven to be the book Ii purported to
be- The witness then answered that from
the examination and comparison made by
him he would take the book 10 be the bills
payable book of the Indiana Cabinet Com
pany, of Boston, and that it showed no en-
try relating TO the drafts.
NEW YORK BOOKS.
The books of the indianapolis Office Fur
niture Company. of New York were then
brought forward. and the witness said he
had examined them and found no entry
upon them of the drafts. He examined the
account of the Indianapolis Cabinet Com
pany, and it contained no entry relating to
the drafts. He was then shown the account
of the Boston company, and said ii showed
no Indebtedness by the Boston company to
the New York company. He then turned
fha Of ha
Company, and found a charge to the woot-
en- company, the total charges against the
Wooten company being s44. So. He said there
was no entry corresponding to the draft
by the United States Office Furniture Com
pany on the Wooten Office Desk Company,
which draft constituted part of the $4i 600.
The witness was then asked what trans
actions took place between the bank and
the cabinet company the day the $4
600 in drafts deposited by, the cabinet
company. He answered that the cabinet
company took out of the bank on that day
cash items" he said, were drafts deposited
by the cabinet company and returned un-
paid after being sent out for collection,
which were carried cash items in the
receiving teller's drawer. He said the re-
ceiving teller, in counting his cash at the
end of each day, was compelled TO count
| these worthless drafts as so much cash.
| He was handed one Of them and told to
| read it. 1t was a draft drawn by the Indi-
annapolis Cabinet Company on the Syracuse
| Cabinet Company, OF Syracuse, n. Y, and
| was for the of $74494. He said this
| draft had been deposited with the bank by
| the cabinet company on April 20 and sent
| forward for collection, returned unpaid.
and, after that carried as a cash item. He
said the cabinet company could draw on
| this draft before ii had been sent forward
| for collection, and that after it was re-
turned unpaid it had not been charged off
| of their account, and was still subject to
| the check of the cabinet company The wit
ness testified that on the day the $4,000 in
worthless paper was deposited i'm the bank
| May g. 1893. the company. by various checks
which were read. checked out about $50, ,0OO
| and that this left the account of the cab
| $4,000.
HAUGHEY PROTESTED.
The witness was then asked if he had
| heard any conversation between Haughey
and either of the defendants concerning the
| amout of this overdraft and the leash
| items being carried by the bank, and an.
! swered that a conversation concerning
| them had occurred between HaugIey AMI
| the defendant Reed. Mr.. Harris asked
| that the court instruct the jury that this
| conversation could not be considered
against the other defendants unless it wa:
shown that they had some previous knowl
edge of it, and the jury was so instructed
| The witness said that he had hearC
Haughey tell Reed that the overdraft wa!
| too large, and that Haughey objected L
cash items" He said Haughey gave hi
| reasons for the objection, saying that n,
| had TO report TO the Controller of the Cur
| rency and the bank examiner He seid h
| Thought Reed had said he would try TO ar
| range il. The witness said this conversa
| had ahn aDea hafo fI