Evening journal., 1916-07-26
fcontInned From Pege q

pect Of their becoming interested.
through the DUPONT Securities Com.
pany aforesaid. along with him in the B
purchase OF the said stock of T. Cole
man DUPONT Now, the evidence is
uncontradicted that Henry r. du.
Pont and Eugene r. dupont never
heard Of any opportunity to become
interested in the dupont Securities
Company until April 16. 1915, when
the letter was sent out by Mr. Pierre
5. dupont to a great number of the
dupont family whom he intended to
interest in this matter following the
line of the suggestion in r. Coleman
duPont's letter to him that the Exec
utive Committee and the younger
members of the DUPONT family should
more Importantly be interested in this
corporation Not until April l6, so
that the allegation of the bill is not
true and is not supported by the evi.
dence. 10 is true that HarrEG, Has
ken. Harry f. Brown and William
Coyne were members of the Board
and had been spoken TO. not as MEM
bers of the Board, may IL please the
Court but as heads of departments.
Your Honor will remember tho testi-
mony. There we're five men, these
three and Tallman and Ramsey. FIVE
heads of departments who were offer
cred by Mr.. DUPONT 1850 shares of
stock in the DUPONT Securities Com
pany. That was carrying out the
purpose that he and r. Coleman du-
Pont had nursed so long and wanted
10 effectuate for their own good and
the good of the Company. OF those
five heads of departments three were
q N.a..4a
ne letter OF March s. 1915 sent to
every member Of the Board contain
ing the reservation Of 1924 shares OF
stock OF the DUPONT Powder Company.
Your Honor has heard the explana-
tion of what that meant. Il gave to
each one of these three men, in case
the resolution was adopted, precise
~ and absolutely the same as they
would have received If they had held
the stock in the DUPONT Securities
Company ] shall advert to that later
in discussing the question of the ef-
feet of the Board of Directors meet
ing.
Later on, Complainant is inform
ed believes and therefore AYERS that
a majority of the Board Of Directors
voted in the negative upon this reso-
luton by reason of the influence OF
Pierre S. DUPONT and his associates
aforesaid. and by further reason OF
the fact that Pierre S. DUPONT and
his associates had held out to large
number of the Board of Directors that
they would be permitted TO share in
the purchase of the stock OF T. Cole
man DUPONT through the dupont Sc
curities Company aforesaid, and there.
BY make large profits for themselves
out OF the transaction instead OF
bringing about a purchase OF said
stock by the Company; and at OF
about said time or very soon thereaf
ter the said Henry r. DUPONT, Eu
gene Il. DUPONT Harry G. Haskell
Harry r. Brown and William Coynt
became Interested in the purchase o
the stock OF the said r. Coleman du
Pont through the DUPONT Securiue
Company defendant above named. A
the said meating' and so forth. Tn
criticism which ! made on the pre-
cedins paragraph applies absOlutell
10 this Henry f. DUPONT and Eugen,
E. DUPONT were not interested in IN,
slightest degree. nor did they know
that they were likely to be interested
prior TO April 16, which was after
these meetings were disposed Of
Another of the nash assertions made
in this bin occurs In the next para.
graph "rhat in order to pay for the
said stock purchased from the said
r. Coleman DUPONT. it was necessary
for the said Pierre S. DUPONT and his
associates la the DUPONT Securities
Company to borrow'a large sum OF
money required 10 be paid as the
cash payment which sum the com
plainant is informed and believes and
therefore AYERS. was approximately
$500 GOO. That the said Pierre S
duPoni and his associates did not have
either credit or marketable collatera
which would enable them 20 effect thl
lc-n ip that amount" The only evi
dfnce in this case upon that suhiec
Is q the effect tha; they had credi
and they had marketable collateral
Ia that point the allegation remsin
lWrrcyed. for these men had both tn
collateral and the credit Lest
forget Il, in trying
sonsider The very numerous thing
iha have 10 be considered n reply
ms 10 tho argument that has alread
heen made let me incidentally as
Your Honor's attention at that pom
20 lae testimony OF Presser. the pre-.
dent Of tho Bankers Trust Compan
'f New York Mr. Presser tcs me
sinimatively that he had a CONVEX
sation With p s. duPon. upoa th
Ubiect Of personal responsible t.e
before the guaraniors were finally q,
ceptcd. and that from him as a ger
.lem2n with whom he was acquainte
and whose word he relied unon. 4
was assured that each man was alb
70 respond for the amount Of h
guarantee on that contract. Tle stoC
Itself had its value II mad a ma
Eet value for it was bought and sol
on the market and the allegation
the bill utterly fails in these two r.
spects.
Signed the Assent.
A great deal is made in the MIN
paragraph of the organization of II
y DUPONT dc Nemours & ComcaI
OF Delaware with its capitalization
s24ooooO0 Of common stock. N
Johnson in his oral argument
Your Honor referred to this. il
plledly Classifying It as mart of I
scheme to obtain control and Z
scheme which is set forth i'm n
5ill to cheat and defraud. I ask vc
donors attention. without taking
time TO refer to the record. 10
cross-examination OF Mr. William
luPont 20 When did you sign
assent TO make the transfer from
Powder Company TO the +. 1. dup
de Nemours Company? A. I did
sion if mill fNO-fhirde had SIG