Year: 1872

A. Not exactly as stated above; have fuliy an
swered according TO my recollection.


O. Did you not at some such interview represent
that General sickles had full power TO act IN the
mattel and pledge yourself 70 ABIDE py any agree tSe
votes majority OF the entire Board OF Directors
to carry out such agreement A. Not except as
above; certainly intended to represent that any
settlement General Sckles might make on March
IL would be assented to by the Board and ! in
companys interests as understood them, to
assist IN carrying them into erect, ana believed


Q. DID you, in any such interviews prior to July
last state that General Sckles had no authority
in the premises, or In any way repudiate or question
as above have said that General Sckles had no au
thority from the Board, but that had no doubt II
he had reported as the result OF his interview with
Mr.. Gould on March 12 that 10 was necessary to
condrm the old release u would have been zone,
from those previously made.


CONFIRMATION OF THE RELEASE CONDITIONAL.


q: DID you not, In one or more such interviews
with Mr.. Gould or his counsel expressly alude TO
that part OF the agreement between General
sickles and Mr. Gould which provided for the con.
alresh to have that part Of the agreement carried
out A. have always said both TO Mr.. Gould and
to his counsel that thought that this confirmation
could be obtained. and on the terms that also
stated that ! would do what properly could


@ sss no. na Toa nan
nothing looking to settlement could be done
until Mr. Gouid's accounts with the company were
Mr.. Watson, were actively employed In making up
these accounts; that nothing could be hurried, be-
tnat when they were made up, II they showed
simply, as MI. Gould claimed, that he was charge.
dent dent or or even Illegal expenditures, but expendi-
lures made in what he supposed to be the interest
Of the company that then upon the reconveyance
most OF which were embraced in the then
pending SUIT against Gould, ! had no
Of the old release, and that l would
try to 40 SO; but stated many times to his coun-
sell and at least once 80 Mr.. Gould in the presence
OF his counsel that IT. contrary to His representa-
ti0ns, II should be found that ne had put into his
own pocket large sums Of money, 50 large THAI he
pany, that then no arrangement such as he claimed
had been made through General Sickles or any
confirmation OF the release could be obtained, and
to this Mr.. Gould made no objection, always claim
Ing TO me, In the most positive terms, that his
accounts were tul and accurate, that ne owed the
covered OF the character indicated, as the fact was
otherwise; ! never assumed or believed that "a
known when the Old release was given, unless
reparati0n was made.


terviews, promise 10 obtain the opinion OF counsel
favor OF the validity OF such release and to re-
said company together with the opinion Of your
self to the same efect2 A. II was suggested to
me that should give an opinion as to the validity
taking the opinions OF other older and ADLER coun-
sell which would have more weight with the
Board; but this was upon the belief on my part, as
stated above that the only open questions save
those embraced in the suit then pending, were as
to imprOvident or illegal expenditures. not that
release could be q bar to GOuld's prosecution for
previously unknown Frauds but any action in this
direction was postponed until MI. watson should
have completed his accounts and no oncs opinion
was taken.


Q. was not an assurance OF this kind one OF the
considerations upon which you induced Mr. Gould
TO secure for the benefit OF the said company re-
sale to that company OF about 49, OO0O 600 or the
solidated mortgage bonds OF that company at eighty
per cent A. No. On the contrary, by the terms
Of that repurchase Mr.. Gould provided for the con-
tngency OF q large Judgment upon these old claims
being finally recovered against him, by an express
clause that in that event the amount OF the actual
profit realized by the company on the resale OF
these bonds should be credited to him on such
judgment, and thereby practically admitted the
invadity o! the pretended release now set up, and
the null ty OF the alleged agreement through Gen.
eral Sickles.


@. Were you not informed, or had you any rea-
son to believe, when the said affidavit was drawn
that the purchase OF 900 shares of stock by Mr.
Gould, as therein set FORTH was actually made
some time in NOvembcr 1885, and not in August
1860 A. did not know when these stocks were
purchased, nor did then or now consider that OF
any consequence; the charge is fraud in selling TO
the company at " stocks worth 28, which Gould
then owned; II he had paid par for them 1t would
have made no ditference; he made q speculation
lost and then attempted 10 throw the loss on the
COMPANY.