The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-07-13
DECEIVED ON NOTES,
CIRCUIT TESTIFIES
COntradictS Testimony That
lie Knew Collateral Was
Worthless.
DIDN'T VALUE ASSETS

Testimony previously given by several
OF the witnesses against him was aatly
contradicted Yesterday by ex-City Comp
troller Grout at the resumption OF his
trial for perjury before County Judge
Lewis In Brooklyn. The defendant. still
testifying on direct examination In his
own behalf. had come to the point where
each item in the ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
all told-was to be accounted for.
Among other things he denied that
David A. sullivan. his predecessor as
president of the tnion Bank. had ever
spoken to him disparagingly of the as
sets OF the institution or had told him
that Thomas h. Tompkins. formerly a
director In the bank. did not have a
nickel with which to pay his indebted
ness on "A note Of s~73,4so.?0. Tompkins
bad so testified.
Mr.. Grout says that he thought Tomp-
Nns was good when he included the note
In his quarterly report to the Banking
Department as a good and coIlectible as
set. Sullivan had brought Tompkins TO
see him shortly after the reopening OF
the bank. but Mr.. Grout was positive
that sullivan had merely made "A plea for
more time. Nothing had been said about;
Tompkins not having n nickel and never
expecting to have one.
do you think | would have renewed
the note IL ne had told me that I've
asked. He told me MIR. Tompkins had
just started into business and was hard
up for cash that he could pay no part
OF the principal or Interest at that time.
As to the statement that Sullivan told
me a great burden had been handed me
In the bank. 10 such thing was said.
sullivan never said "A thing in deprecia-
ton OF the assets OF the bank"
As n further defence Mr.. Grout said
that he looked upon the estate of Toinp-
kirs's father, Edward X. Tompkirs. as
ultimately liable for the note II Tomp-
kins himself failed to pay II.
George T~onkonogy. "a lawyer formerly
retained by the bank. was another wit
ness whose testimony Mr.. Grout con-
tradicted. He said that there vas mo
reason nor scmblance OF justice I'm the
claim that the George Wiener note for
sj.i04.l3 vas not u good and collecNble
asset.
~''ronkonogy said he didn't talk to me
about this note" Mr.. Circuit continued.
He did talk to me about Il. There was
NV NNC bA"lfoshtloil u
his part to deny responsibility. And |
want 10 say II the bank were open to-
day I wouldn't have a bit OF trouble coll
lecting that debt
Mr.. Grout said too that Joseph Michaels
was lin error when he testified that he
did not speak to me about the Aetna
Development Company note for So
4s9.47." Sullivan. president Of the bank.
and Mr.. Michaels. "A director. constituted
the Aetna Development Company. ac-
cording to Grout. He regarded both
sullivan and Michaels as personally re
sponsihie. he said, and had carried the
item as good and collectlble' Oh that
theory.
There were other items carried in the
repor; OF which Mr.. Circuit admitted he
worthlessness. The Rechnitz and POI
ruch note for s4J.0 81 was the largest
OF these. Blame for this was placed on
Louis Burstein of counsel for the bank.
Mr.. Grout having depended on Burstein's
assurance that the debt was good.
Mr.. Grout made 1t plain that he had
never fixed the value OF any of the as
sets carried In the false report. The
Banking Department had done this. he
said. adding that he had been unwilling
to n the responsibility OF fixing the
value Of something of which he had no
knowledge. lie believed the report TO be
true when he swore TO II II had no IN
tention TO deceive any one. he said. much
less the state Banking Department.
His direct examination Will be con-
tinued to-day.