The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-04-03
Max Wasserman Was. in Ignor--
ance How 1t Was Accu-
~. .:..
KNEW. NOTHING OF BUSINESS.
Observation-Disclosures. to Show He Did
:. Not Trust. Sfoss InpIi,-- IN.
-: City: :: ~.

p.
: Were Max Nv assermal and Louis Sloss
the friends that Mr.. Dorm says.they were
or were they merely acquaintance as Mr..
Thomas avers2; Did Wasserman trust to-
what Sloss told him or did he take the pre-.
caution to. verify: the statements: Sloss
made2 These were the.questions whichie6n-
.sunled the time of the:court and the tenn
pers Of the attorneys yesterday in the big
stock suit. Me-. Dorm maintains that to- his
client Wasserman Sloss' word. law, and
it was taken as truth with ia confideRee
which made legal advice upon the subject
unnecessary. Mr.. Thomas, on the other
hand, declares that when it came to%busi-
ness Wasserman trusted to no man s word,
but hunted up well-read attorneys and con-
suited them upon all points: which rose in
his business tran sactions. -
AS these opinions are radically different
tits natural that they caused some friction
between the attorneys. Was serman was
under Thomas eross-exafnination all day
and in the attorneys eager probing for
the yeriffcation Of his theory regarding
WasserInan's business acunten he ran
against host of objections from Dorm.
Most of these objections served only to de-
lay the case; however, for but few of them
were sustained by. the court. =.
Many of the questions in cross exa NINA
ton were devoted to ascertaining WasseT-
mans idea OF. the value of the stock:which,
he says, was so. .ruthlessly torn from him
by the Vaccinations Of MI Sloss. 70 this
end he was asked a number of questions as
to his knowledge of transfers of livestock
of the Alaska. Comm ercial Company and
the prices paid. Wasserman knew of but
one transfer. however,. and this inclined
rather to help than TO hinder his case. 1t
was when. the estate of his father was being
distributed that his: sister, wishing to have
the: value of.the shares IN. the Alaska Com
nercial Company instead of the shares
themselves, was allowed $150.a share for
the stock. It took several hours of~objec-
tions and round about questions to bring
out. this. infornlationj however. =.
/: Wasserman was also very pointedly
questioned regarding his: manipulation of
his remaining 1000 shares of. stock when
he came to San Francisco from Raris to-
finally complete. the transaction over the
original 400 shares. At that,tfme he feared
that having been ay:from the United
States SO long he might have lost his eiti-
zenship, and by holding the stock as ain
alien, thereby :.jeopardize: the chances of
the company in. securing the new lease.
He; therefore, Endorsed his stock over to
Mr.. Sless condltionally.
Upon IJllS pOlifl ME-. 5-uOuldS SllOWeQ all
insatiata Die greed for testimony. He wanted
to know whether Mr.: Wasserman had not
consulted a lawyer as to- bis position, and
how far his Endorsement to .Sloss COM
mitted him.. Also if, he had not gone to
Washington for that purpose, in defiance
of the fact that Mr.. Sl0ss had said it would
be all right. It was drawn from the wit
ness that he had been. to Washington and
had consulted a lawyer, and then: Mr..
Thomas appeared satisfied. -.
Wasserman was also led to admit the
factthat he knew the American lease was
given to the highest bidder, the idea being
to show he could see for himself the pirr-
poses for which Mr. Sloss wanted the cheap
stock, and that he had no. need to rely
upon the explanations of his partners
Wasserman insisted, however, that he had
no business capacity and. had not troub ied
himself about the details of the. com pany
so long as this valuable portion of his
'.strong-box" fortune paid him his divi-
dends. -.