Every evening, Wilmington daily commercial., 1906-05-24

not have been protected by any tangible
security other than the small plant
mentioned
"Addicks' next step was 10 cause the
construction company TO sell the stock OF
the gaslight company TO a second gas
light company for 100000 in cash
and Sl.29S 900 of the second gas COM
pany's bonds (of which Sl.2lSOO0 we're
without the first four years interest
coupons) and S2lS0OO of It's stock
These bonds were likewise without tan
gible security other than the small plant
mentioned. lie then caused the Bay
state Gas Co TO accept the 81 ,2lS 900 of
bonds without coupons of the second
gas company in lieu Of the order for
81 100000 OF the first gas company's
bonds. The construction company re-
turned 70 the Boy State Gas Co. the
81 10000 loan. but including this sum II
had never expended IN the enterprise
more than Sls000O u had therefore
made a profit OF e9lO000 in cash and had
some bonds and stock Of the second gas
company.
Prior 10 the exchange Of the stock Of
the inst gas company for the bonds Of
the second gas company, Addicks had
caused the Construction Co. to pur-
chase from his associates in this company
their shares in the company at a cost of
less than $50 900 in cash and some of the
stocks and bonds of the second company.
lie had, therefore. Individually made a
net profit Of $500 900 by selling worth
less securities TO the corporation of which
he was president and a director.
The answer 20 the suit filed on behalf
of the defendant some time ago is not
responsive and amounts merely to a
general denial that Addicks ever did
anything that was improper.
Mr.. bodine argued that the matter IN
which the money was obtained clearly
indicates that no legitimate investment
on the part of the Bay State Gas Co. was
intended by Addicks
Tho construction company received
the money, as Addicks prelends, under a
contract to erect a plant for the gas light
company, but the defendant has not pro-
duced such contract and no evidence Of
ats existence appears on the construction
company's books" said Mr. Bodine.
Whether such a contract existed or
not, 1t was certainly clear that the CON
slruction company could not have been
entitled Hereunder to receive either
81 600 900 In cash or in bonds Of the gas
light company for work on account Of
which there had been expended only
SlS0OOO.
"The real object Of Addicks in causing
the bond purchases TO be made was to
secure money for speculation in the in
come bonds of the Bay State Co. and
IN Butte and Boston copper stocks. On
the very day when the first money was
paid by the Bay State Co. in account was
opened by the construction company
with Brown, Reilly & Co., brokers, Of
Boston, for the purpose of speculating
IN the bonds of the Bay State Co. and
the copper company stock. In this
speculative account the construction
company is credited with cash items ag-
gregating S330,OO0, and il has been
proved by the books of the company that
these items represent sums paid to the
brokers out OF the first S500,0OO re-
ceived from the Bay State Co. for the
gas light company bonds A good por-
tion Of this $500 600 was generously
used by the construction company to
repay to the Bay State Co. the money
loaned by the latter for the purpose of
building the small gas plant The
records show that income bonds of the
Bay state Co. were purchased for the
construction company at prices averag-
ing about 90; and before the expiration
of a months time they we're sold to the
Bay State Co. at so, which realized a
handsome profit"
Addichs did not appear before the e2-
aminer during 1908 He finally testi-
fed before Mr.. Robb in the Stephen
Girard Building. Mr. Bracken did the
questioning Most Of Addicks testi-
mony was drawn from him during cross
examination by Mr.. Bracken.
@. What is your connection with the
Queen City Construction Co. ? A. l am
it's principal stockholder. / do not re-
member whether | am an officer or not
/ could not tell without looking at the
minutes
Q. Can you recall neither OF not you
made any payment to any Of the owners
of the stock of the Queen City Gas Light
| Co. other than the issue of the stock o
/ the Queen City Construction Co. for theii
| holdings A. / can not at the present
time That whole transaction, whor
committed, TO paper, passed out of my
mind. excepting as to the stock
Q. What connection had Silas Petit
with the matter at the time A. III
was an owner in the Queen City Ga
| Light Co. He may have organized thl
| Construction Co. for all know.
Q. DO you know whether his interes
was purchased by anybody ? A. Yes
sir. 10 was purchased by me, think
because had to.
The subsequent questioning was witt
"A view of eliciting from Addicks state
ment of his relations with the Queen Cit.
Cns Light Co. and the Queen City Con
| struction Co. He said he financed tn
construction company, but had no con
nection with the gas light compan,
when the construction company was or
ganized.
q. Was not the sum Of 100000 pai
to YOU in Wilmington at the time of tn
settlement of the Buchanan suit by th
same person who paid the sums to Roge
Fosters and Dwight Braman for whicl
Lawson. Wcidenfeld 4 Co. have claime'
credit in their account with the Bay Stat
Gas Co. A. This is the first | knew O
their claiming credit for 100000.
Senator Alice in response TO questions
by Mr. Braoken, said:
81 am member of the efexecutive com
mittee Of the Bay State Gas Co. and
have been president since December 4th
! 1901
When asked about his knowledge q
the Queen City Construction Co., Senate
Alee's memory was not good. He sal
Addicks told him of the existence OF sue
company about the time thst none
was 10 I've borrowed from H. He said h
supposed the concern was all right aC
cording 10 Addicks' statements to hr