The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1897-03-02
EXpertAcCOuntantS on the
Witness Stand,
Mr.. Ware Tells What His Ex-
animation Disclosed.
Fictitious Assets Shown by Arm
strong to Amount Of $4,000.

iht Ntritl Vs. w. EDttlltIb c E)ouD tOlll-
pany case carried over from last Friday
was resumed in the United States district
court before Judge Aldrich at 10 O'Clock
this morning. The testimony up TO this
point showed that Cyrus G. Armstrong
had not taken money from the Steinert
company and that the manager of the
Providence branch of the firm, Edward
Steinert, had told many persons that
Armstrong had not taken money from the
firm; that the books accounts of the firm
had been inflated and that Armstrong
had paid $6112 to the Steinerts under
pressure.
The defense thus far has declared that
Edward Steinert was not responsible for
what he said being of unsound mind ;
that Armstrong paid the money to the
Steinerts without protest and that the
books showed that he was defaulter.
Charles Warner who was the last wit
ness on the adjournment of the case on
Friday, an expert accountant from New
Haven, took the stand for cross examina-
tion by plaintiffs attorney. He explained
that the day book was the proper place TO
enter charges and the accounts of returned
goods 1t ought TO record all monies re-
ceived and paid out. The cash sales
should appear on the day book also The
witness explained the proper and regu-
lar system of keeping the day book in
single entry bookkeeping. On November
20, 1882, Joseph Banigan's account credited
$780, The cash book only showed 1925; a
shortage of s75; witness testified that the
charge of $500 on the day book had been
changed and altered. The annual entry
charge on the day book was 500 and it
was changed to S475. The cash book
showed a credit cash of 1926.
December 30, 1880, ledger page $50,
showed shortage of 80 cents in the f. w.
Miner accounts. There was no apparent
attempt to balance the cash at any time.
There were no puttings up on the cash
book. Music sales did not appear in the
cash book. Witness testified thst he saw
three different handwritings on the books.
After March l6, 1882, there was not so
much difference in the handwritings.
In the redirect testimony witness said
in making his list he used care to make
certain that the items were in the same
handwriting. The alteration of the Ban
igan item was in the same handwriting.
The witness said that after examining
Mr.. Armstrong; handwriting he should
say the entries in the books were made 10y
him.
Mr.. George III. Ware, expert accountant
of Providence. He testified TO 200 ex-
aminations during the past 10 years. He
was called September, 1892, TO examine
the Steinert books. The books were in
such condition that il would be neces-
sary to make an examination and check
back all the entries About the middle of
September, 1892 witness began his exami-
nation and was employed more than
two weeks. He checked all the original
entries for two days when Mr.. Steinert
said to him "we have come To settle
meHt with Mr.. Armstrong Witness said
that Edward Steinert wanted him to find
ont the value of the estate and To appor-
tion the amount TO each partner He con-
tinued the examination on this line. The
statements showed the profits of the
business. The installment accounts
showed that the accounts had been
raised. They were fictitious accounts
amounting to S5749. Al, March /, 1891.
The property of the firm was conveyed to
the Steinert corporation on the basis of
the figures presented by Mr.. Armstrong.
The defense attempted to show that the
fictitious profits were loss TO the Stein
crt corporation when it was changed from
the Steinert firm, but the judge ruled the
matter out and no exception TO the ruling
was taken.
Mr.. Ware continuing his testimony said
that the Steinert firm had made money
This was shown by the ledger account
of assets and liabilities. Mr. Armstrong
raised the accounts from 1891 to 1872 to
the amount of $D6l2.
This was shown by the semi-annual
statements. There were s6Gl2 of fictitious
assets. The fictitious assets would make
Mr.. Armstrong returns on actual loss to
the corporation. The difference noted
could not be accounted for on the theory
of Increasing the profits, unless IL was
done through imperfect bookkeeping
At this point the jury was excused until
Q 80 o'clock because the defense wished to
show To the court that Armstrong stood
charged with a similar offcnse elsewhere
nc the time Of his trouble with the Stein
crts. This was ruled out by Judge Aldrich
and one exception was taken. The court
took recess until 30 o'clock.