The Washington times., 1914-05-06
BANK PAID $500 TO
WRIGHT AS AFEE
Witnesses Tell Congressional
{ Probers jurist Saved Much
g Money for Concern. ..,s.
Continued from First Page.)

ne board of dire ctorS apprnpriating $50
or his services in connection with thu
-'hnks transactions with the Bureau u
National Literature and Art"
DO you know whether or not thert
Nas any discussion :Iu'ong members Of
nc board OF directors Of the bank prior
= the adoption o. The resolution au'
norihing the payment of that 500 tc
.'udgo Wright"
There was discussion between two OF
nem. That is between Mr.. Karrick and
Mr Baker"
Which Mr.. Baker,
Mr.. James NJ. Baker"
You heard these discussions?"
WIS present at some of them
state what was said at those times
when you were present"
Says Propnety Was Discussed.
1T was suggested that Judge Wright
be paid a certain compensation for his
services and the question of the amount
was brought up and it was decided
. that 500 would be the amount asked tor
from the board. Then the question OF
the propriety Of this amount being Of
tered Judge Wright was taken up and
II was suggested that we consult with
Charles A. Douglas and Mr.. Conrad
II. Syme, who were the banks counsel
as 10 the propyiety of making this pay
ment to the judge"
1T was first discussed as to whether
or not the bank would authorize the
payment 10 Judge Wright" question
ID Mr.. Mccoy.
That was simply as to the amount. II
But the question was not raised as
to whether something should be paid?'
No. that question was not raised"
Now, in discussing the question OF
ne propricty of the payment, what
Nas saidr'
The fact that Judge Wright was a
udge on the District bench was brought
Ip, and II was then that they decided
% consult with counsel
What was the nature of the ques-
lions discussed
Merely the propriety OF Judge
Wrights receiving any compensation
or his services inasmuch as he was
I Judge
You mean legal propriety?"
No. don't think legal propriety was
ever brought into it"
Statute Not Mentioned.
sand was it mentioned at any Of these
conversations that there was a statute
which covered the matter of n judge
taking fees asked Mr.. Mccoy.
Not 10 my knowledge" replied Nj.
S!aybaugh.
as you can recolIect with regard to the
q uestion of prcpriety?"
The only point that 1 can recall is
that the fact that Judge Wright, being
c Judge, 1t might be improper for him
10 accept a fee"
DO you remember WHO made this
suggestion s that he be paid somethirg?"
Il cannot recall whether il was Mr..
Sarrick or Mr.. Baker. 1t VAS one Of
Lhem."
You were familiar with the business
.ealings between the United States saw
ings Bank and the National Bureau Of
Literature, and Art?"
u was"
"State what the dealings were be-
tween the two companies"
When became cashier of the United
States Savings Bank, the bank held in
IT'S possession what they called pur1
Chases. which We're in reality bills Of
sale given by the Bureau OF National
"ovcrinc 2 certain amount of subscrip-
lion OF contracts. These purchases were
all guaranteed by the Bureau Of Ma
1ional Literature and Art
About January l, 1910, the Werner
company, which was a corporation
ollied with the Bureau of National
literature and Art, went into receiver s
hands and at that time the bank had
in course Of collection a large amount
Of checks drawn by the Werner Com
ture and Art, which had been deposited
Nv them in the United States Savings
Bank
Feared Bank Would Lose
These checks amounted to about
S24 900 and were dishonored by the bank
IN which they were drawn, and that,
COUPLED with the book contract pur-
chases made the United States Savings
Bank liable to lose between &S5,ooO and
$4,000.
Shortly after the Werner Company
went into receivers hanGs there was a
bankruptcy suit brought against the
Bureau OF National Literature and Art.
ana Charles A. Douglas was appointed
receiver IN bankruptcy. He was author
Ized by the Supreme Court Of the Dis
Trict of Columbia to continue the col
lection of all the subscription contracts.
either owned by the Bureau of National
Literature and Art. themselves. or by
certain Of the creditors of the bureau.
and the United States Savings Bank
vas named as the collection agent"
Now at the time Of the failure Of
Ibis bureau, state. in general, the ma
ture OF the collateral or security of
any kind which the bank had as against
the Indebtedness of the bureau to the
bank" asked Chairman Mccoy.
The only collateral II had at the time
Of the failure was 4 Considerable
amount Of these subscription book con
tracts, certain set or books. ana II n:id
certain furniture in the building be-
longing to tho bureau. and after the
failure II was attached.
did It have some notes OF the Wer-
ner concern
No, not at the time of the failure"
did the bank have contracts on its
hands for collection on account Of the
Werner Company"
Yes. il had a large amount Of these
contracts
''Ther upon the failurA and rank-
ruptcy Of the Bureau % National Lit
oratdre and Art. the bank attached
s".nc Of these contracts"
Contracts Were Attached.
1T attached all of tna contracts be-
longing to the Werner Company and al
So the furniture in the buildjnE."
Did it have notes CT the Werner
Company"
Not at that time. 1t got some notes
Of RAUL Werner shortly aft tn" fail
Urc. 1t got 4 certain amount of cash
and a series Of notes.
How did the " crncs concern come 20
givo notes."
q. 1T was not the concern: il was Paul
the company and pressure was brough:
uPon him. and he gavc these notes TO
hclp liquidato tho checks
During the progress Of The reorgani-
~ati"n was the question considered as to
how much the Indebtedness of the Bu-
reau ot National Literature ard Arts
amounted to-"
Il don't believe that question vas
considered during tho reorganization. I