The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-04-20
EXPERT DUY'S REPORT
FILED WITH AN AFFIDAVIT IN THE
SUPERIOR COURT YESTERDAY.
FavOrs De Pauw University I'm the Suit
Against the American Plate
Glass Company.

George c. Duy, the expert appointed by
Judge McMaster to investigate the books of
the American Plate-glass Company on the
petition of the plaintiff in the case of De
Pauw University against William L. Kann,
president of the American Plate-glass Com
pany, and others, for an accounting of
business transactions that have taken place
between the defendant company and the
Penn Plate-glass Company. filed his
report and an affidavit in the SUI
perior Court yesterday. 1t supports the al
legations made in the original complaint
and sets out that the sale books show that
the Penn Plate-glass Company has been the
sole purchaser of the products of the
American Plate-glass Company, and that
the shipments were made direct from the
American Plate-glass Company to the Gus
toners OF the Penn Plate-glass Company,
and that the shipments were made free
of charge.
Accompanying the affidavit was one of
William H. Hickman, chancellor of De
Pauw University, and a list of questions
asked at the examination March 10 that
President Kann failed to answer, which
the plaintiff asks the court 10 order an
swered. Chancellor Hickman, in his af-
fidavit, says he has information and be-
lieves that William l.. Kann is and has
been since the present suit was brought
president of the American Plate-glass Com
pany and the Penn Plate-glass Company;
that a summons sent to the sheriff of
Madison county to be served on the Penn
Plate-glass Company and was returned
mot found was so returned because of a
fraudulent arrangement. If any, to mislead
the sheriff; that affiant was ignorant of the
fact that Kann was president of both the
American and Penn plate-glass companies
until the examination March Is; that he
believes all the product of the American
Plate-glass Company was sold to the Penn
Plate-glass Company, and that the sale
and profits were a large part of its bust
ness; that Kann spends half his time in
Pittsburg, Pa, and half of his time in
Alexandria, Ind, in the interest of the two
companies. The affiant supports the find
ings of Expert Duy with his oath that he
believes they are true.
He says the suit involves an inconsistent
relationship that exists between the direc-
tors and officers of the American Plate
glass Company, that its transactions with
the Penn Plate-glass Company have been
fraudulent, that President Kann is under
the control of the Penn Plate-glass Com
pany, that the suit is brought TO inquire
into the good faith of contracts. TO COM
pei an accounting by the defendants and to
require them to pay the American Plate
glass Company large profit that amounts
to hundreds of thousands of dollars which,
he alleges. were fraudulently obtained.
The questions that President Kann is
asked to answer relate to the profits of the
Penn Plate-glass Company. whether the
profits of the Penn Plate-glass Company
exceed those of the American Plate-glass
Company, IL the entire output was sold to
the Penn company below the market price,
and If the prices paid by the Penn COM
pany were the same as those OF similar
| glass, all of which Kann refused to an
| swer by the advice of HIS counsel.