The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-09-03

On cross-examination Frier testified
that he ceased to be stakeholder on Oc-
tober 5, 1887, but was then still with Mr..
Flood as his private bookkeeper. He re-
manned on terms of friendship with Mr..
Flood until the latter's death.
sieberst-Did Mackay ever say anything to
you in order to control your action?
Witness-Never. Mackay never spoke to me
or knew was director.
When the afternoon session opened
Attorney Sieberst raised the question as
to whether it was legal proper to take
testimony, as it was Labor day, according
to the proclamation of the President.
The court said if there was no objection
from the other side he was satisfied to go
on. No objection was made and President
Fish of the Consolidated California and
Virginia Mining Company was recalled.
He was asked by plaintiffs attorney If he
remembered $4,000 having been paid Pat
ton for the alleged extinguishmento of fire
in the mine and replied that he did.
Objection was made to this on the
ground that it had been gone into before.
Sieberst explained that he wanted to
show that other frauds had been perpe-
trated at this time by the defendants and
quoted authorities to sustain his right to
show this. He then continued: II want
to show that these submissive and passive
directors, who were subservient to Mackay
and Others aided the plans of defendants
in securing advantages for themselves"
Attorney Deal-Every witness has shown
that their dealings have been fair Nothing in
the shape of fraud has been shown. When
they show fraud in one case they will have the
right to show other frauds. No evidence that
q court would consider for one moment has
been submitted.
Sieberst-In making the contract with the
Comstock Mill and Mining Company they con-
cealed the fact from Mr.. Fish that they were
stockholders in that corporation.
After some further discussion the objec-
ton was overruled and Sieberst continued
his examination. Witness testified that
the fire was duly extinguished by Patton
and that the $4,000 was paid to Berry.
Pattons son-in-law, under instructions
left by Patton before he sailed for Austria
liza, and that Berry was employed in the
Nevada Bank. The $4,000 was paid to
Patton in addition to his regular salary as
superintendent.
Witness attention was called to his
deposition taken year ago in which he
stated that the fire which Patton was sup
posed to have extinguished was then still
burning, and admitted that his testimony
given then was incorrect.
Sieberst-Didn't the money voted to Patton
and paid Berry find its way into the hands of
MeSsrs. Mackay and Flood?
don't know anything about that.
Witness further admitted that the
directors, when the consolidation of the
two companies was effected, were selected
after consultation with Mr. Flood, but on
cross-exarination showed that all of these
directors had been on the boards of one or
the other of the old companies. He further
testified under the cross questioning of Mr.
Deal that the $4,000 had been paid Super
intendent Patton for services in extinguish-
ing the fire in the mine, and thereby open
a nf va l11a
did not know that large body of ore had
been discovered by Mr.. Jones before the
new contract of December %, 1885. He
was not told OF it.
Sieberst-Where did you sell the bullion?
Witness-To the Nevada Bank.
What was the charge at the bank for hand
ling it?
don't remember
Who does know?
The secretary of the company.
Was the Jones contract made before the dis
covery of the large body OF ore was known to
you?
l don't remember.
On cross-eXamination Frier testified that
the extra $4,000 was paid Patton be-
cause he had asked for it before he would
undertake the task of extinguishing the
ire in the mine, and this apparently large
price was paid him, and was considered
cheap as compared with the offers made
by others who sought to get the contract
for this undertaking. The price asked by
one of the outsiders was $3.50. 900.
gkMorris Rehfish, member of Rehfish &
Co., stockholders. testified to his firm hav-
ing given the proxies to Secretary Haven
of the Consolidated California and Vir-
ginia Mining Company of aR the stock of
that company in their possession just pre-
vious to the annual elections held by the
stockholders during the years between 1885
and 1891 inclusive.
William D. Walker, who during this
same period was administrator of the
estate of E. A. Richardson, testified to
having pursued the same course with the
stock that stood in the name of Richardson
as trustee.
Secretary A. w. Ravens was then re-
called and gave the different dates and the
amounts of each dividend declared by
the Consolidated California and Virginia
Mining Company between January l, 1886,
and December 5, 1891. These were thirty
five in number, aggregating ST. per share.
They were paid on 216,0 shares of the
company, making the total amount of
dividends paid during this period $2.272, 900.
This witness was placed on the stand by
counsel for the defense and Attorney
Sieberst stated that his cross-examination
would take at least an hour He added
that he felt very weary from the days pro-
ceedings, and on this showing court was
adjourned until 10 A. NJ to-day.