The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-05-10
THE NEW YORK BRANCH.
witnesses Explain the Transaction.
with Cabinet

THE NEW YORK BRANCH.
Witnesses Explain the Transaction.
with Cabinet
Upon the converting Of the court, yester-
day morning. the reading of the records
or the cabinet c~ompany's mortgages, which
had been interrupted by the adjournment
the evening before. was concluded, and the
pages or the records containing copies of
the mortgages were introduced in evidence.
Charles Clark. ~bookkeeper and purchaser
or the New York branch, was the first wit
ness called to the stand. His testimony was.
In substance, the same as that given upon
the former trial, showing the connection of
the Collins with the New York house. He
testified to the purchase of the business by
himself in August, 1893, and the execution
of his notes. secured by chattel mortgage.
He said he had gone to Boston to negotiate
the sale OF the New York branch to the
Sommerville Desk Company, in September.
1893.
Mr.. Burke-was F. A. Coffin in New York
at that time?
WitnessI think he was there after that.
Mr.. Burke| al to know If he was in
New York at that time.
WitnessL don't know.
Mr.. Burke-Did you see him at that time
and have a conversation with him?
Witness-No, sir.
The witness was then shown various
drafts drawn 'on the New York branch
which had been accepted by the company.
and said he had never seen them in con-
nection with the business, nor did he know
John NJ. Roberts. who signed some of them
as treasurer and some as secretary, in his
oficial capacity. Drafts accepted by the
New York branch. after the sale Of the
business to Clark, were introduced, and the
witness said he had never seen any Of the
drafts. He also testified to the sale of the
purchase notes for 500.
The witness was then passed TO cross
examination by Mr.. Winter. He testified
that at the time of the sale of the business
to Tufts he was indebted to the cabinet
company in the sum of about So, 800, in adj
dition TO a small Indebtedness to other firms.
The purchaser assumed this indebtedness
and paid Tufts 1915 for the business. He said
ne asked the advice Of f. a. Coffin before
opening negotiations with the Sommerville
Desk Company. He consulted Coffin again
during this year In regard to a sale of the
property. He said he asked the advice of
Cof1n because he was trustee in the mort
gage given TO secure the purchase notes.
He said he had paid about s12, 900 on the
indebtedness contracted by reason of the
purchase. The proceeds of the final sale of
the property were turned over to Alfred
BYRD, who held the purchase notes. He
said the bill of sale was signed by the cab
met company as we'll as the INDIANAPOLIS
Office Furniture Company to bind the cabi-
net company in a release of the indebted
ness OF the latter to the cabinet. which the
purchaser was not to assume.
The witness was then passed to redirect
examination. Mr.. Burke took up the month
~ statement made by the New York branch
for the month OF July, 1893.
Mr.. Burke.
Nrffna~n It
Office Furniture Company.
Mr.. BurkeI didn't ask you who il was
made by. but who it was made to. WHY
tense?
The defense objected to the manner of
MI; Burke In addressing the witness. Judge
Baker turned to the witness and told him
to answer the questions directly and with
out evasion; and the witness said the state
ment had been made to the cabinet COM
pany.
Mr.. Winter then took up the statement.
and, by questioning. showed that the state
ment was made from the books of the com
pany, and was correctly transcribed from
me books after the usual practice of book
keepers, and that the books showed the
New York branch indebted TO the cabinet
company In the sum stated.
MI: Burke then took up the statement
10 an Indebtedness II there was an existing
contract between the cabinet company and
the New York branch that the expenses
of the business in New York should be paid
out of the proceeds and the surplus profits
sent to the cabinet company. The defense
was not sustained. The defense then SOUGHT
10 further examine the witness upon the
statement and entries upon the books, but
were interrupted by the court.
Il shall not permit any further cross-ex-
ker.
Mr.. winter-we ask an exception ON the
record. showing that we desire to further
c-ross-examine this witness and permission
TO do so is refused by the court.
Judge Baker-The exception may be noted.
ment OF the court. the defense has ex-
bausted the facts within the knowledge of
this witness.
John NJ. Tufts was then recalled and ex-
amlned as 10 the assignment to the New
York branch OF the lease held by hir, at
the time of the sale by him and the entries
made upon the opening of the books Of the
The government then introduced the letter
book OF the cabinet company, containing
copies of letters written by the cabinet
company to Tufts. relating TO entries 10 be
made in the books and the manner OF con-
Quoting the business. both as between them
selves and with the outside world. The de-
Tense objected 10 the Introduction of the
letter book on the grounds that the original
letters were the best evidence and the gov
eminent had not made the necessary prelim-
mary proof to entitle them to introduce
copies.
ter book admitted in evidence.
Henry W. Donald. the auctioneer who
sold the Clark and Pierce notes, was called
ana testified 10 having sold the notes, and
gave their number and amounts. Both sets
of notes were sold to Alfred Byrd for 500
each.
Judge Baker-Were those notes In your
hands at the time of the sale?
Witness-No, sir; just a memorandum OF
the notes.
The witness was then passed TO cross
II ava animation nv Mr. nprnran He said thew