The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1904-03-24

CONCLUDED FROM FIRST PACED
self, and then applied to work on the mill
owned by the National Manufacturing Com
pany. .,,
questioned Van Fleet.
I'm the office of the Consolidated Paper
and Bag Company. was the answer .
Did he READ them before he signed
themT'
II believe so: he could have"
Now about these NJ. b. Tousley notes,
Mr. Brown. What Go you know about
them asked Van Fleet on. 3. Tousley
Is Miss Beryl Tousley, stenographer IN
Mr. Browns Office who had neither money
IT y was In the bank one day and Collins
asked me II / thought that Miss Tousley
would object TO signing notes fer the Con-
eolidated Paper Bag Company. He SAID II
was a temporary arrangement and the notes
would be returned He gave me two notes;
one for $4,000 and one for 5000 L carried
them In my pocket for several days and a
few days later he telephoned me II
had had Miss Tousley sign those notes;
I said had not and he requested that |
make the 5000 note $500 note. | asked
Miss 1ousley TO sign them ana she oio'
WAS anybody given money on the
4 DON'T think anybody got any money
out on the notes" Brown answered Inc
notes were not even credited TO anyone.
what was the object of the notes?
ut was understood they were to be
TO the credit of the Consolidated Paper Bag
Company TO reduce an overdraft
Were the notes credited to the ConsoI-
idated Company. to Miss Tousley or 10
No. sir. I went over the bank books
with Mr.. Collins and they were not cred
what was the debt of the Consolidated
Company to the bank?"
BROWN EXPLAINS IMPORTANT
POINT.
1.-The total Indebtedness of the company
to the bank was 80. s62- 90
Mr.. Brown, you have heard it testified
I'm this trial that the Indebtedness of the
Consolidated Paper Company to the bank
was slO5.OOO. have you not?'
Eyes. sir"
How do you explain the discrepancy be-
tween the books of the bank and those of
tie company"
PLANTATION OF this important point. he SAID
there was q list of checks between May
a. 1899, and May 5, 1902, amounting 10 W.
400 which had never been charged on the
banks books 10 the credit of the company
that the company was never given credit
for the two Tousley notes of $500; that a
charge of real estate amounting TO $3.50. 90
was not made to the company that credit
tickets of the company showed deposits OF
5000 and So 400 on Aug. IS. 1903 and $4,000 on
Sept. l, which were not recorded on the
banks books.
Judge Van Fleet then questioned the wit
the company. Brown said II was done TO
take up the previous debts of the CONSOLE
dated Company.
You examined the banks books, you say.
with Mr.. Collins Were any debts taken
-None were taken up replied Brown.
1.-The bonds were issued on the advice of
Mcintosh. the bank examiner, who said II
was better to carry an account or bonds IN
the shape OF bonds than an overdraft.
made out the bonds and they were signed
by Mr. Collins, TO whom they were given as
trustee of the Indiana National Bank.
They were to be credited 10 the account OF
the Consolidated and the Tousley notes
were then TO be surrendered.
Judge Van Fleet then exhibited the bonds
TO the jury Where were the bonds cred
ifed?" asked he.
ION the books of the company and the
bank and We were to take up the over
draft"
You mean then, afr. Brown, said Van
Fleet who empha sized explicit clearness in
the explanation, that the bank was to
credit the bonds and still hold a debt
against the OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES the
overdrafts.'
THE notes we're to be returned and the
bonds were to take up mortgages which
were ahead.
1.-The bank owned the bonds then and
they were not put upon the books?"
They were not
COMPANY NOT GIVEN CREDIT
Having declared the Indebtedness of the
National Manufacturing Company to the
bank was s7o.14S.s4. Brown was asked tc
explain the discrepancy between that