The Washington times., 1914-05-06

every night, frequently in the after
| noon, also"
Were you present at these meet
| ings?"
| 4 was present at most of them"
| What was the principal question
discussed at these meetings:
The main question discussed was
| how to protect the bank from losing III
| that particular crisis
Were those meetings before or af-
J ter Judge Wright was a member OF the
organization committee?
| He was present at two of the meet
| lngs."
Slabaguh Next Witness.
At the afternoon session George E.
Slabaugh, former cashier of the United
States Savings Bank, testified regarding
the settlement between the bank and
the National Bureau of Literature and
Art in which Judge Wright took a part.
He said that Mr.. karrick was originally
suggested as the banks representative,
but that James NJ. Baker, a director,
said that Karrick was not diplomatic
enough" and Judge Wright was Sc
lected.
Slabaugh said he did not recall any
occasion upon which Judge Wright,
while a director. had given legal advice
or services to the bank:
1t seemed to me, he said, that
Judge WrIght's services were similar
to those of other members OF the eX-
ecutiye committee
Congressman Nelson asked if Judge
Wright's services in settling the claims
between the bank and the bureau rep
resented legal services or the services
of u bank official.
THAT would be an opinion on my
part" said Slabaugh, but the services
rod IN 70 ha nf
character"
The witness said he did not think the
hank received preferential treatment in
its negotiations with the bankrupt
Bureau of National Literature and Art.
Cashier Wilbur H. Zepp. recalled to
rectors present at this meeting were:
James L. Karricb, presiding; James
NJ. Baker, c. X. Bergman, william ID.
Berry, James S. Fraser, w. r. Davis,
and ". Z. G. Penny.
Conrad Syme. now Corporation Coun-
sci and then attorney for the bank, went
on the stand later. and said that in
passing upon the validity of this pay
ment he had referred only to the banks
action, and had not attempted TO pass
upon the propriety of Judge Wright ac-
cepting this money.
1t was at this juncture that Mr.. Nell
son read the Revised Statutes.
That Attorney Charles a. Douglas had
written to him and suggested that he
change the language" of the first letter
he wrote the bank regarding tAe valid
ity Of the payment, was testified TO by
Mr.. Syme. Mr. Douglas point was, ac-
cording to MI. Syme, that his :irst letter
read as though it referred to the legal
services Of Judge Wright, whereas only
business services" were involved. Mr.
Syme said it was proper for the judge
to accept the fee if the services were
business services"
w. E. G. Penny, a director of the
rector of the United States Savings
Bank since october. 1903. and that he
was present when the resolution to pay
S5oa to the jurist was adopted.
What discussion, IL any. WAS there
preceding the adoption?" asked Chair
man MCCOY.
well, the question was brought up
by Mr.. Baker who was then vice presi-
dent of the bank" said Mr.. Penny. He
said Judge Wright had done some work
for the bank whereby We had saved
large counsel fees. believe Mr.. Ber-
500 and Mr.. Baker seconded it,
'One of the directors, Mr.. Davis,
think. questioned about paying this
money, saying he thought Judge Wright
was receiving fee as a member Of the
executive committee. but they argued
that we were saving counsel fees by
paying Judge Wright this $500, and they
argued he was more familiar than any
body else in settling this claim"
Was there objection made to the
mo, M Davis just questioned
whether we should pay or not. The
statement was made that Judge Wright
was attending to this business for the
deal more money If done by some other
counsel
what was said about getting coun-
sel?'
Nothing, that / remember
"Who was counsel for the bank
them
Mr.: syme and Mr.. Douglas. I be-
lieve."
DO they receive a retainer or
salary?"
Il don't know whether they have ever
received any salary"
Mr.. Bean Asked Question.
Upon the adoption OF the resolution,
was there submitted anything regarding
the validity of the payment" asked
Congressman Beall-
Not that know Of" said Mr. Penny |
Have you talked OF this recently
with any other director"
Il have talked about It to Mr.. Davis"
Chairman Mccoy asked what was
discne=ed during the conversation be- |
tween MI Penny ana and Mr.. Davis. |
"Only what ! have outlined" said
Mr.. Penny. Il remember the partic- !
ulers Of the board meeting on my |
own accord: of course 1 did not re- |
member the exact date.
Was there anything else that Judge
Wright did except legal advice TO
merit the payment Of fee" asked
Mr Nelson.
only he served as a member of the
executive committee"
Did YOU understand this vas strict |
~ for counsel fees?"
II understand It was for settling |
that claim between the bank and the |
Bureau of National Literature and |
Art I don't know whether you would |
call il a counsel fee or not.
Would it have been the official duty
of Judge Wright as director and
member Of the executive committee TO |
adjust this matter without compensa- |
tom"
Would Have Been Extra.
1t would have been giving him a
good deal OF extra work.
You voted for this sum on the !
statements made to you?"
Yes; Willingly"
You voted TO pay because the work |
was different than the work the judge |
was expected TO do as q member OF
the executive committee and a dJrec-
t0r!'
Yes: l so understood it. ] voted for
il because ! was given to understand |
that Judge Wright had settled a claim |
whereby we would have had to pay |
out large sums Of money"