The Washington times., 1914-06-16
WR|GHT'S NOTES
BASIS OF INQUIRY
rmer Trustee of Sealed Pack
age Ice Company Is Ques-
toned.
Continued from First Page)


it known the Wright note was in ex'
istence?"
Yes"
There was some question. was there
not. as to whether or not Mr.. karrick
ad changed the subscription which he
made To the stock Of the company. Was
that known"
Yes the testimony was taken TO find
out about the alleged changing Of kar-
ricll's subscription. had been informed
he had subscribed TO S12.599 of the stock
md he had cut it down to s, 900. The
This point"
Was it testified to that the change
WAS made by KarriclC?"
Yes, by several witnesses, believe" !"
Reason for Testimony.
after that testimony. was there any
suggestion that the matter should be
taken to the District Attorney for his
sIrention?"
Il do not recall"
Was it openly suggested by you that
the matter should be taken to the Dis
trict Attorney in view of the testi-
mony in the Karrick case?"
Il don't recall. The testimony was
taken with that in view, If the testi-
Inony was strong enough. 1t was in
my mind when, as trustee, 1 talked 1t
over with -lr. Classic, my attorney"
Did you talk It over with Am
brose2"
Il do not know"
Had he mentioned it?''
I do not recall 1 felt that Ambrose
knew what We were after
Was it after this testimony that the
onfer came from Ambrose"
Yes. after that"
This $1,000 note of Justice Wright
did not come into your possession. nor
uia any other note as to that?"
That is right"
In whose possession was it?"r
4 understood that these subscrip-
tons and notes given for subscrip-
lions We're being held as collateral for
loan, and thought the Wright note
was among those transferred"
Did you ever see the collateral list?"
No"
Did you ask anybody to show it to
YOU
Il understood it was of very little
value"
For financial reasons?'
Yes. and some of the subscribers
had repudiated their subscriptions.
hpIk Mr.. Syme was one
Did you hear the names?'
Il knew some of them at the time"
Did you hear whether Wright re-
pudiated his?"
No I had the books showing sub
se:lptions and notes, and 1 made full
Inquiry and was convinced they did not
amount to much
For whom did Ambrose make an
offer for the assets?'' asked Congress-
man Nelson.
The Karrick Offer.
For a syndicate. I do not know who
was in It"
And Ambrose made an assignment
10 Karrick later"
Who made the sale as trustee?"
Il did
What did you count the Wright note
WORTH"
- Lid qid not figure on it"
Il did not know where it was IN the
Grst place. / asked Ambrose and he
w Guild not tell me. did not give much
l1rrick offer. ! realized that il we
q. ere to get anything for the creditors,
We would have TO get an offer from
A%rFick- The assets consisted of an ice
ant. a claim against karricH and these
tscriptioH notes. The ice plant could
..o' he sold for anything, for there was
len on the machinery. IL the prop
o ~ had heen sold at auction. it would
l.s.e heen TOR junk. The claim against
=, uTICk Was doubtful. so the KaITick
e fer was the best thing"
What did you Set?"
About $500"
What WAS gOOd2'
The claim against Karrick Was about
ne only thing"
NoT knew there was a note of a
"c%e Of the supreme court of the Dis |
'fIct Why old you not and out where |
b. vas? Why did you jusr ask Am !
, ros" about it?" pressed Congressman
An these subscriptions and notes, as |
: have explained, were put up as coll |
literal security for the payment Of |
Ute in some bank"
Schedule f Assignment.
At this juncture Chairman Mccoy
allied attention to an exhibit, repre-
.enting a schedule of assignment from
tie Sealed Package Ice Company to
ne United States Savings Bank, Sep
i"rnber 2e, 1910, for S6,952.50, in
/" h!ch. he said. the Wright note was
.ot mentioned. and neither was a
stock subscription by him. On the
back of the assignment schedule. ac-
tnralng TO Mr.. McCoy's statement
here was memorandum OF u trans
er TO Karrick and Baker
Sesuming his story, MIR. Sinclair
''oceeded 10 elaborate upon his rea-
.%hs lot not pressing for possession
- inc wright note. He said that il !
r. harrlck had not made the offer ,
the assets. little, would have been
"ailzed; as k2rrick himself had large
80 bA'iS aSdiilsI lne Ice company.
rAsmuch as the offer was made Mr. |
-.Lciair said, the question of the notes
fn subscriptions was not important
f him. as the whole thing was turned .
eT. |
Did you examine the collateral to
- II the Wright note was there?"
ed Chairman Mccoy.
No. IL would not have made any /
"a ned" q
Why was the Wright note not c
'"ong the assets? What have you \