The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1895-02-05

fornia, and by the time the continuance
had expired he would be on hand.
District Attorney Barnes then made his
opening statement to the jury. He said he
would prove that customers of the bank
who had overdrawn their accounts were
compelled to deposit checks, which,
though worthless, seemed to swell the
assets of the tottering bank and deceive
the Bank Examiners when the bank was
inspected. He would also prove, he said,
how returns were made upon these worth
less assets, and that the defendant, well
knowing the returns to be false, swore
they were true.
The morning was taken up with the pre-
hminary testimony. Deputy County Clerk
w. A. Deane identified the articles of in
corporation of the bank. The statement
OF the bank for the half year ending Janu-
airy 1, 1893, was then read and identified by
B. Mel. Hardisty, secretary of the Bank
Commission, and by Al Gerberding, G. II.
Dunsmore and W. H. knight, who were
then bank commissioners.
In the afternoon when E. II. Tharp, a
notary public, was called he was examined
by Attorney Livernash in regard to the
statement of the affairs of the Pacific Bank,
which was sworn to, or purported to be
sworn to, before him, by Richard II. Nc
Donald Jr., on January 10, 1888.
The main point which Attorney Liver
nash tried to bring out was whether the
document was sworn to in Mr.. Tharp's
Office and whether Mcdonald sworc to it in
person. There was no record of the trans
action in Mr.. Tharp's records, and the wit
ness memory did not assist him in recall
ing the exact details. He only made records
of anything pertaining to transfers and
matters pertaining to real estate.
The witness identified McDonald's sigma
ture to the statement, but could not say
that he saw the defendant sign or swear to
it, either in his Office or at the bank.
When the record book was produced it
revealed nothing bearing on the trans
action, and bore out Mr.. Tharp's testi-
mony that he kept no record of affidayits
sworn to.
Columbus Waterhouse." called out Dis
trict Attorney Barnes, and the man who
was director of the Pacific Bank and
president of the Peoples Home Savings
Bank, stepped up to the witness chair. In
response to questions the witness told of
his connections with the Pacific Bank.
Mr.. Barnes then plunged into the details of
the peculiar transaction between the wit
ness and r. II. Mcdonald Jr. on December
81, 1892.
81 received message on that day." said
the witness, "asking me to call upon Mr..
Mcdonald at the Pacific Bank imme-
diately. did so, and Mr.. Mcdonald in
formed me that he wanted my check for
100000. / told him / had no such amount
on deposit. He said it did not matter as
the check would not be presented. He
wanted checks drawn on the California
State bank at Sacramento, where the firm
of Waterhouse e. Lester keeps an account
81 protested that such a transaction was
not business-like. Finally consented to
do it, and gave him six checks, one for
$4,000 and five for $4,000 each. did not
have that amount of money in the Sacra-
mento bank, but then the checks were not
to be presented. 1 could, however, have
taken up checks for that amount if l had
been compelled to. Mr.. Mcdonald did not
tell me what he wanted the checks for. On
January 8 made out check for $10O, 900
on the Pacific Bank and received the six
checks back. There was no money passed.
did not have $780, in the Pacific Bank"
''Are these the checks?" asked MI.
Barnes, producing seven slips of paper.
'They are" replied the witness, after ex-
aiming them.
Mr.. Waterhouse then explained that for
many months he had had no recollection
OF this transaction. In fact he had denied
that it ever transpired until short time
ago he recalled it and then after another
search found the checks. 1t was then that
the circumstances of the affair came back
to him.
The checks, as well as Mr.. Water