Evening journal., 1916-07-07
Counsel in TiIfs Over Admission of
Financial Evidence in DUPONT Case

sued by the Securities Company?
A. ] do not know that positively,
but ! have no reason to think II is
Q. Then where was this peril or
menace you were guarding against
when you did not consider that the
collateral would be sold? There was
no risk Of that What alarm could
have come to the company?
A. ] do not think the question was
that OF harm to the company. The
question was that owing TO the fact
the company's credit, and so forth
had been used, that therefore the stock
was the property OF the company.
Q. VIII you tell me how the COM
pany's credit had been used?
A. In my opinion It had been used
in borrowing the $s,5OO.OOO
Q. How?
A. Because / thought that obllga-
tion could not have been incurred ex-
cept by officers OF the company and
those who had charge OF investing its
funds.
O. Then IL you found that It could
be raised by the men as individuals,
you would change your opinion Of the
whole transaction, would you not?
A. ! think II would be almost i'm
possible TO find out what could have
been done then.
The witness was then cross-examin-
ed as TO his criticisms OF the purchase
Of the stock. Speaking of Alfred /
DUPONT, Mr.. Graham asked the wit
ness:
Q. The only thing he criticised
that you can remember was the use
OF the company's credit You said
you went a step further. Besides
the company's credit, what else did
you criticise at that meeting?
A. criticised the plan Of the Off
GERS Of the company forming a con-
trolling or substantially controlling
holding company and borrowing money
to finance a large transaction.
Q. Do you not know as a matter
OF fact that that company only holds
% per cent, Of the voting stock Of
that company?
A. / did not recall that That
would not alter my opinion on the
subject
Q. You still think II was a control
OF the company?
A. In addition to the stock which
they owned outside OF the Securities
Company, II would be higher than
that
Q. Why could you object TO the
transfer OF r. Coleman duPonts
stock to a corporation. If you could
not object to it if he held Il?
A. 7 would see no objection to the
transfer Of his stock to a corporation
II there was nothing to consider ex-
cept the corporation and the stock.
Q. What made Il dangerous in
your Judgment? What else was there
TO consider?
A. Il was partly a question Of
danger, but It was more a question
OF wrong J thought wrong had been
done.
Q. I understand you to say that
II tho stock had been bought outright
and paid for, then il would have been
perfectly legitimate TRANSACTION and
you could have found no fault With ~
A. Provided the right thing had
been done IN the matter Of the 10000
shares. think.
@. What rlgh; thing,
A. II that had been brought again
the attention of the company and
ay had had an opportunity to pass
% II on its merits
The witness said he was an inter-
vener In the suit, but that he did not
get Philip l. dupont. TO file the suit
and did not know who did get him to
do SO.
The witness was next cross-ques-
toned as TO his refusal OF the offer
made by p S. DUPONT. TO take some
Of the DUPONT securities company
stock. and asked If ne did not say he
could not accept the offer out Of
friendship for Alfred T. DUPONT The
witness said he did not make that
remark. but that he did say, they all
felt friendly to Alfred" The witness
said his real reason for refusing the
p. S. dupont offer was because il was
against his convictions.
The ross-examination ended here.
and then there was a lengthy redirect
examination as TO the connection with
the company OF the various directors
who at the time Alfred S. dupont Of
fered a resolution 90 the board to
purchase the stock Of the Securities
Company for 5000 a share. voted
against II.
p. r. duDOnt on the Stand.
Philip F. DUPONT. who filed the orig
inal suit. was the next witness. Mr..
DUPONT said he had lived at Merton.
Pa. for ten years. He told Of reading