The New York herald., 1922-06-20
BROKER NDIER CASE
ESTONEHAM AGENT
J. j. Delaney Has Securities
Left Over After Sale of
StOneham & Co.
WATTS FOR BULL MOVE
Illinois Complainant Loses
Ground in Case Against
Owner of Giants.
STOCK SOLD LONG AGO
Hughes & Dier Reports on
State of Wilson Account
Regular and Correct.

Charles A. Stoneham, owner of the
Giants, admitted yesterday that he still
is interested somewhat in securities
once held for customers of his broker
age, which he sold to Hughes & Dier.
This admission was made iat the
close of the adjourned hearing before
Magistrate Simpson in Jefferson Mar
ket Court of the complaint of F. r.
Wilson Of McLeansboro. ILL.,, against
Stoneham, growing out of the transac-
tions Wilson had with, Charles A
Stoneham & Co.
Stoneham's agent in connection with
the securities is John ]. Delaney of Al
Broad street This is the same De-
laney who has figured in the bank
ruptcy proceedings of E. D. Dier &
Co. Fred Andrews, one time cashier
for DER, has testified that he sold
through Delaney the securities he OBJ
tained by making loans to the Dier
concern a comparatively short time
before the DER failure.
Seek Link with DER Holdings.
At that time Andrews had left the
Dier firm and was in business for him
self. The attorneys for the trustee ir
bankruptcy have been much interested
in the connection established between
DER and Delaney through Andrews.
In the proceedings in the police court
where Mr.. Stoneham sat the greater part
of the time in what appeared to be any
thing but happy frame Of mind Wilson
is asserting that Stoneham failed to give
him a proper accounting regarding the
purchase of 500 shares of Studebakei
stock, and thus violated Section 957 OF
the Penal Code. The defense has been
that Stoneham went out Of business and
turned the stock in question over to
Hughes & DER just year ago.
Stoneham, on the stand was asked by
Daniel Blumenthal, counsel for Wilson
the date he closed out the brokerage
business. He replied June IS, 1921"
We'll. IL that is so, why did you write
in October TO Samuel Munich of Hart.
ford Conn, asking for additional margin
of S112 2o002"
There followed an argument, Stone
ham contending he had not asked fo
margin. but requested the customer Il
take up his securities and pay his debi
balance.
THAT just shows we We're doing oul
best to get out of business he said
well. what became of the securities?'
I'VE still have them. We had to carry
them and the securities of other custom
ers until the market turned. II we had
sold them Munich would have owed us
$4,000"
when you say you still have them
who do you mean?"
"They were turned over to J. J. Della.
ney of Al Broad street, who acted as oul
agent to wind up the affairs of the con
cern.'
"Then Mr.. Delaney has them?"
YES
rs Mr.. Delaney member of any ex
changer"
This was objected to. but Stonehan
admitted that Delaney had been g
clerk In the employ of his brokerage
He refused, under che guidance of Let
Bondy his counsel. to answer Other
questions regarding customers securi
ties turned over to DER, Mr.. Bondy's
frequent objections being sustained by
the Magistrate.
wilson's stock All Sold.
Previously. the complainant Wilson
had made a rather poor showing, as
he admitted that Hughes & DER had
sent i'm accountings regularly and that
these showed where the 800 shares OF
Studebake were.
1t appeared too, that Wilson bought
an additional 400 shares and finally sold
the lot. all through the DER concern
and without making any demand fol
an accounting from Stoneham until long
after the DER failure. He had sold the
stock, through DER. too. and had re-
ceived checks for 5000 and $4,000.
Wilson said he had written the Chi
cago manager for Stoneham. objectine
TO the transfer of his stock to Hughes
a. DER because he know nothing of the
latter firm. This led Magistrate Simp-
son to ask:
Then with about $4,000 involved you
didn't take any other action than to
write to the Chicago manager?"
II can't recall all the Incidents of the
transaction" replied the witness.
The Magistrate gave the lawyers a
week to submit briefs