The record-union., 1898-12-23
BANK BOOKS AND TRANSFERS
THEY CUT A FIGURE IN THE B.
AND L. TRIAL
Another Day in the Fight of Re-
ceiver O'Nei1 Against the
Mills Bank.

The celebrated case of Receiver
O'Neil against the National Bank OF
p 0. Mills & Co. was resumed IN the
Superior Court yesterday morning at
$50.
Director D. r. Jones of the assocla-
ton was called again for a continual
tion of his cross examination by attor-
neys for plaintiff. He swore that ne
was present at the critical meetings OF
stockholders in December, 1890 he
did not know that there was ever any
meeting Of stockholders between that
date and December 1896 He did not
remember whether he was present at
the February meeting of directors, put
at the next meeting which he ATTENDED
he heard what had taken place, py
the statement of Alsip, which he reau
from memoranda Alsip reported lhe
amounts he had borrowed and told
what had occurred during the interim
between February and the meeting III
question. On redirect examination
witness said that he did not remember
whether Alsip reported the kind OF Sc
curities that had been given. AT the
February meeting the securities were
not gone over and no report was made
by Sol Davis, so far as witness re-
membered. He held ten shares of the
14th series. Witness said that he as
sumed the figures of Secretary AlsiI
to be. correct
Receiver ONeil was next called. He
testified that, as Receiver Of the asso-
citation. he took charge Of the Briggs
ranch as soon as he became receiver
The gross proceeds from grapes were
about 81, 400 this year.
Henry Myer was next called by the
defense. He testified that he once had
five shares of stock in the Union
Building and Loan Association, which
he bought about 1891, possibly earlier
He said he was never notified that his
stock had been transferred to the new
association.
On cross examination witness said
he felt sure that he got his stock prior
to 1891. He had never attended a
meeting of the stockholders until De-
cember. 1895, when there was a row
Alsip had always held witness shares
by proxy. On redirect examination
witness Swore that he was never no.
titled that his shares had been trans
ferred in such a way as to make him
a member of the new association.
G. G. Brown was next called. He
swore that he was a stockholder of the
Union Building and Loan Association
in 1884. He was never informed that
he was transferred to membership III
the new corporation that was formed
in 1891 His book was always at Al
sips office, and he never attended any
meetings of stockholders
There was no croSs-eXamination
E. H. Mckee testified that he was 6
stockholder in the association, having
become such about 20 years ago. He
never received notification that his
stock had been transferred to the as
ISOLATION of the same name, which was
organized in 1891. He was at no time
asked to consent to the transfer of his
stock, and he never attended any
meeting of stockholders, but always
gave his proxies to Alsip.
On cross-examination witness said
he had stock in many series. He be-
lieved that he ceased membership in
the association about two years ago
While a member he had a pass book,
paid his dues, and gave his proxies
without inquiring whether the asso-
citation had changed hands. He paid
the money, not caring who was Presi-
dent or Secretary. He did not know
who was Treasurer after the change
in 1891. D. O. Mills was Treasurer
when witness surrendered his stock.
S. H. Davis testified that he was a
stoekholder in the association. The
value of the various series was stated
in the Secretary's report. He was or
a committee with Mr.. Mclaughlin fol
the purpose of examining the property
Of the association. He said:
We compared the Secretary's figures
with the books and found them cor
rect. We examined the notes an6
mortgages of the association anC
everything that we called for was
given to us. / think we made a writ
ten report
Attorneys for the defense asked the
Receiver to produce the report in ques.
tion. but plaintiffs attorneys argued
that the request was. improper, als(
they denied that they had any such re-
port. Witness was then shown a news
paper clipping from the Bee" of De-
sember 23, 1895, purporting to be the
report in question. He identified it a.
such and the clipping was filed as sec
ondary evidence. Plaintiffs agreed
that the clipping be admitted
Witness then testified that he never
took stock or consented to take stock
in any new corporation
On cross examination witness said HI
was defendant in an action begun BY
Receiver O'Neil. He had a pass bool
and paid his dues right along, giving
his pass book to Alsip so he might act
as proxy.
H F. Root swore that he was a stock.
holder of the association many years
ago. He was never notified that he ha6
ceased to be stockholder in the ole
and become a stockholder in the new
association.
On discrimination witness said h,
did not remember when his membership
with the association closed. He useC
one passbook all the time, and paid hi:
assessments from first to last withou
interruption. He never heard of an.
change of laws or corporations.
B. Wilson'S evidence was purely cor