The daily morning journal and courier., 1905-08-26


 profit to some of it's directors is also admitted. But the directors say that the responsibility for these losses must be divided among those individual de- fendants who directly participated in or had, or by reason of their official duties and position should have had, Knowledge Of the transactions.'
 Tho table of alleged improper salaries 1o Equitable officials, which was en- bodied in the states charges, is declar- ed to be true statement of the figures. A direct adraission is then made that these sums were paid without sufficient vouchers or audit, but the directors say their opinion is reserved as to whether .'such sums were large and in all cases unwarranted.
 Admissions of greater latitude, how ever, are made on the subject of pen E sions and to the charges that money under the guise of fees was received by directors and stockholders who were Simultaneously officers of the Equitable and other corporations. After admit ting that these moneys were received as charged the reply states:
 Many of these defendants were ig- norant of said transactions, which were not of a character necessarily known to the whole board of directors" Further on the reply states: Some of said pensions were found to be justifia- ble. others excessive and some improp- err
 Denial is next made of any knowledge or Information sufficient to form be- lief concerning the payment of attor- neys fees, which were disproportionate to the services rendered
 Taking up the $6S5,OO0 loan of the Mercantile Trust company an admis- sion of it's existence is made, but the directors deny that they improperly permitted this transaction any say:
 These transactions never came be- fore this defendants board of directors, and as this defendant is informed and believes were known only to the de- fendants, James W. Alexander, Thomas D. Jordan, Henry c. Derning and per- haps to few others of the individual defendants who's this defendant is at present unable to identify.
 AS this defendant is informed that there are certain entries in some of it's books which do relate to these transac- tiors, but as, such entries are obscure and unintelligellible except to those who were connizant of, or had partici- pated in, the transactions referred to, this defendant denies that 1t became in any way bound to pay to the Mercan- tile Trust company, the sum of S6S5,0OC of any part thereof
 Finally admissions of the payment of this $685,000 to the Mercantile Trust company on July IA last is made, but 1t is stated that this orrurred only after the Trust company had asserted claim against the Equitable, and aft CT this. claim had been resisted and dis. allowed by the present managing off cers of the Equitable society.
 The $250,000 loan to the Depew I'm. provement company is next admitted with a proviso which states that thi! admission is restricted to ''those of tht individual defendants who were, o ought to have been, cognizant of these transactions"
 The directors then announce that ar examination of all the facts in con. nection with the Depew Improvement company IS now nelng prosecuted WILL view to recovering either by lega action, or by adjustment out of cour any sums that may be found due to tht Equitable society, whether the persons now possessing this money are officer! of the Equitable or of the Depew I'm provement company.
 Charges of the existence of excessive deposits in the National Bank of Com merce of New York, the Mercantile Trust company of New York, the Com, rnercial Trust company of Philadelphia and at least nineteen other banks, ar admitted, but this admission is restrict cd to those directors and officers Wh'