The Washington times., 1914-05-25
TELLS WR|GHT'S PART
IN ICE FIRM DEALS
SIaybaugh Declares Two Com
panies Had Little Money
Fai6 ii en- Capital Stock.
CONTINUED from First PageJ

Continued from First PaSeJ
done in Mr.. Douglass office. / heard
discussions of tn, company"
Who were present al the discus
sions?''
MIR. Baker. Mr.. Karrick. and Mi.
Roper talked it over with me
Was Justice Wright ever present at
the discussionsS'
81 don't recall at any lime that he
Was
"Did the American Securities Com
pany have anything to do with the
National Literature and Art?'
Not at its inception. II ! remember
right. it did later take over some book
contracts"
Did it take over any from the
United States Savings Bank?"
NO, ii did not
He Scheduled Note
Did you schedule Justice Wright's
note in the statement you prepared
after the examination of the Sealed
Package Ice Company"
Il did
Taking up the capital stock of the two
companies. Committeeman BeaIl ques-
toned the witness.
What was the capital stock of the
American Securities Company" he
"One hundred thousand dollars" re-
piled Mr.. Slabaugh.
"HCw much was paid in?'
Was it a large amount or small?'
II believe it was small"
Were the officers of the United
States Savings Bank the stockholders 80
mir. Baker. Mr.. Karrick. and Mr..
Rorer were
WAS their stock paid for"
II don't know"
Were the same men prmoters of the
Yes"
what was its capital stock?'
'tS200.oOo''
How much was actually paid imp
Il don't know how much"
When you made the schedule of the
Sealed Package Ice Company. was there
many notes given in payment Of stock
subscriptions?'
Yes, very many"
do you recall any besides Justice
Wright's?'' i
There was one of Mr.. Karrick's for
5000. and another was one from the
Sealed Package Ice Company to Kar-
rick for 5000 l understood the latter
had been paid"
Take dof All.
did your conversation with Mr..
Baker relate to all or only Justice
Wright's?"
1T related to all the stock having
been issued in a complimentary way"
You included all, despite Mr.. Bakers
statement
Il did"
Even those you did not fnd:'
Yes
Did all those notes get into the hands
Of the receiver OF the Sealed Package
Ice Company" asked Chairman Nc
Coy.
Il believe they did"
Were the officers Of the United
States Savings Bank active in promoting
other companies at that ume?'' MIR.
Beall inquired.
No, am sure they DIDN'T
They limited their operations to the
Sealed Package Ice Company and the
American Securities Company
Yes
MIR McCoy asked if the United
States Savings Bank lost anything IN
connection with the Sealed Package
Ice Company. The answer was in the
On cross-examination by Attorney
Darlington. Mr.. Slaybaugh said that
Justice Wright was not an officer in
the American Securities Company. but
that he might have been stockholder.
In your conversation with Mr.. Baker
was there any inference that Justice
Wright received the stock in a way i'm
proper asked Mr.. Darlington
Il cid not understand it So" replied
Mr. Slaybaugh.
Henry D. Woodard entered an en-
phatic denial of previous testimony that !
Judge Wright had permitted him to
take an exception in a case out OF !
order, that is, that the exception was I
not taken at the time of the trial, but
the Judge Wright permitted him TO en-
ter it in the appeal motion.
Attorney Easby-Smith testified sew
eral days ago that in the McCauly con- |
tempt case. Woodland, the opposing |
counsel. had failed to note in proper |
time n exception, but that upon com |
plain: to Justice Wright that the al |!
legged oversight would be embarrassing. |
the Judge allowed him the except IN |
with the understanding he would not !
Lress advantage through il in the /
Court of Appeals.
Says He Was Mistaken.
Mr.. Woodland. of the firm OF Birney
& Woodard, told the committee that
Mr.. Easby-Smith was mistaken and
that no such incident had orcurred.
Il have no recollection Of such a !
thing, Mr.. McCoy." he said. IF it
had happened it would have Fnade d
distinct impression on my mind. / do
not believe any such thing took place -
Did Mr.. Easby-Smith ever mention
II to you?''
was it contended at the tune by
Easby-Smith that certain exception was
included which should not De in the
record?"
Not that ] know Of" !
Mr.. Woodward reviewed the technical
ramificstions of the McCauly case, and
asserted that the motion to uuash,
when overruled. preserved his rights.
anyway.
what necessity was there for re-
petition Of the exception" asked Mr..
Darlington.
None" said Mr woodward
DO you recolIect that the trial court
permitted an exception for the sake of .
your reputation"
No. it didn't happen That would .
have been a most extra ordinary thing.
and It would have fingered in my mem
ory."
The hearing adjourned until Wednes-
day morning at 10 o'clock