The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1895-11-13
failure OF CITY BANK.
Recalled BY an Action 10 Assumpsit
That Is Nov on Trial.
GUNsrER IS THE PLAINTIFF
lie Is the Assignee of the Defunct Instttu d
tiou and Seeks to Recover Amount
lle Alleges Cashier Jessup
Owes the Bank.

Ex-Cashier George A. Jessup. Of the
defunct Scranton City bank, ana his
sureties ex-Judge w. H. Jessup, DR..
3. H. Throop, and Mrs. George A. Jes-
sup, are defendants in a suit In as
sumpsit called for trial yesterday IN
court room No. 2 before Judge Nc
Pherson, of Harrisburg. The plaintin
is Assignee Joseph A. Gunster.
Major Everett Warren, Horace r..
Hand and W. H. Jessuo. jr., represent
the defendants as attorneys and Judge
Jessup and Justice Hand are also pres
ent taking an active part. The prin-
cipal part Of the examination of wit
nesses was made by Major Warren,
Attorneys s. B. Price. Charles H.
Welles and Edward Merrifield repre-
sent the plaintiff Mr.. Welles opened
the case to the jury and said they pro-
posed to show to the satisfaction OF the
jury that certain amounts as follows:
81, 900, 81, 500, $780, $3.50. $1,000. SITS. $1,000.
$634 and 81 900, realized on notes had
not been accounted for In the affairs
of the bank. Mr. Jessup, as cashier,
would be responsible for these sums,
It was contended.
The minutes of a meeting of the
board OF directors Of the bank held on
March %, 1882. were offered in evi-
dence to show the engagement of Mr..
Jessup as cashier and the fixing of his
bond at $4,000. Next Assignee Gun
utes. which he did. The bond was not
turned over to the assignee when he
took possession Of the banks papers
after the failure. He went to DR..
Throop and asked for. the bond. The
doctor said he had It once. but 1t dis
appeared, and he could not tell where
1t could be found.
Secretary Did Not Know.
N. G. Goodman, who was secretary Of
the board Of directors in March, 1882,
was called to tell something about the
bond, but he was not present at the
meeting when the bond was approved.
and did not know anything about It.
Eber Dimmick and Victor Koch were
called as witnesses. but they gave un-
important testimony.
DR.. B. H. Throop was called as q
witness. He had possession Of the
bond once. but while he was absent in
Europe, Mr.. Jessup came to his office
one day and was given q packet Of pa
pers, but he knew that the bond could
not be found In his papers afterward.
Attorney Merrifield was the next to
testify. He was not attorney for the
bank in 1882, but he was often consulted
about legal matters The object of his
testimony was to prove the contents Of
the missing bond. 1t was brought to
him after 1t was signed, by Victor
Koch. who was then president Of the
bank. He compared 1t with the bond
Of Assignee Gunster, who was cashier
before Mr.. Jessup, and it was word for
word with 1t. except the signature. The
plaintiff has the bond Of ex-Cashier
Gunster, and by offering 1t in evidence
proposes to show the terms Of Mr..
jessup's bond as cashier, because Mr..
Terrified has testified that both bonds
rere exactly Identical as to the pro-
Visions in each.
Testimony Of the Assignee.
The afternoon was spent with hearing
the testimony Of Assignee Gunster in
relation to the accounts over which the
ledgers. cash books, entry dockets,
journals, ETC., was brought into court,
and much time was spent going over
Items and accounts. The plaintifr's 8
side OF the case will occupy today, and
perhaps tomorrow.
Verdicts were rendered as follows:
For the plaintiff in the sum of $1S9. so
in the case Of A. L. Spencer against Jo-
seph Pendle and James Burke. For the
plaintiff in the sum of $123 15 in the case
Of Patrick Kelley against John Smith.
AhS sun "a EoWdTu MClJOHHell
against Mrs. Patrick O'Hara for gro
ceries furnished to the family was tried
before Judge Edwards in the main
court room. Attorney George D. Tay-
lor represented the plaintiff and At
torney James Mahon. the defendant.
The bill amounted to $780, She claim
ed that her husband bought the gro
ceries. He Is now dead. The Jury
found verdict but sealed 1t and will
hand 1t in this morning. The suit of
Katz Brothers against John Stout, ap-
peal. was called for trial in the main
court
In No. 3 court room the sheriff's in
terpleader suit Of Miss Miriam Miller
against w. s. Reed was tried before
Judge Gunster. and a verdict in favor
Of the plaintiff was returned by the
jury. The defendant had a levy made
on the effects Of her parents and among
the property were a horse and buggy
and certain articles Of furniture which
belonged to her. The parents swore
that the outfit and the furniture in dis
mute were DlIrchased with noonev tho