MORE "YELLOW DOG" FUNDS.

See what you think about this scan of the front page of the Sept. 28, 1905, New-York Daily Tribune. Check out the article, MORE "YELLOW DOG" FUNDS, at the top of Columns 5 & 6---specifically paragraphs 4, 7, 8, 12 and 15. Does this look like the original typescript to you, altered perhaps by age or scanning artifacts, or something worse?

It would be significant if Chronicling America, the work of the Library of Congress, had sunk to the same spooky lows as Thomas M. Tryniski's---of 309 South 4^th Street, Fulton, New York, 13069---effort's at Orwellian information f l o w ---fultonhistory.com.

But what could they possibly be trying to suppress when surface details this absolutely delicious are left? Of course, with government investigating capitalists being reported on in newspapers retrieved via the web, the serpent is always eating his tail. Supposedly, Pulitzer's New York World can take credit for single-handedly breaking the Equitable story wide open, and forcing this distasteful display onto the poor public. I haven't found copies of that original reporting online yet, although several year-end synopsis are available.

Sept. 28, 1905, New-York Daily Tribune, Equitable's Inside Wheels Uncovered at Prolonged Session of Committee.
OFFICIALS PROFITED IN SYNDICATES
Entire Burden, Except Taking the Proceeds. Occasionally Borne by Society -Its Share from Some Deals Disappeared.

A second Equitable "yellow dog fund." apparently employed as a feeder for the famous "J. W. A. No. 3" account, was disclosed at the close of the session of the Armstrong insurance investigation yesterday, and so important did the record of this account, preserved in a private and unpretentious black book, seem to the members of the committee that they sat for an extra hour, while Henry Greaves, who was the apparent keeper of this account, testified to the history of this secret record, and incidental to the existence of an earlier secret fund known as the Marcellus Hartley account.

The second of the "yellow dog"accounts, that which occupied much of yesterday's session, was known as the "George H. Squire Trustee" fund, and was deposited with the Equitable Trust Company. In it were carried not a few of the profits made by the Equitable in various syndidate participations and not entered in any other place, and it was apparently subject to the direction of McIntyre, Jordan and Alexander. From this account sums aggregating $265,000 were transferred to the "J. W. A. No. 3 account." and to this account at its inception $55,000 from the Marcellus Hartley account was transferred.

Moreover, it was disclosed that this fund and the cash book for it were in the keeping of Thomas D. Jordan, the former controller of the Equitable, who was summarily dismissed by
Paul Morton for refusing to tell about the JAW No 3 account, and who has not yet been reached by the committee, which desires him to testify before the investigation closes.

In addition to a number of profits from syndicates in which the Equitable participated, which appear in this account, there are evidences of other syndicates in which the Equitable participated only through this fund and from which profits were directed thither instead of to regular accounts.

As to the uses to which this fund were put, and whether they were similar to the uses for which the New-York Life employed its "nonledger" accounts, such as campaign contributions and "Andy" Hamilton transactions, no evidence was adduced yesterday, but it was clear that Mr. Hughes believed he was following a "warm" trail, because of his refusal to leave it at the usual time of adjournment.

Hardly less interesting than the developments concerning the George H. Squire trustee fund were those regarding the syndicate operations of the Equitable through "George H. Squire and Associates," as well as "James H. Hyde and associates" and "Louis Fitzgerald and Associates." In previous testimony the fact had been shown that the Equitable not infrequently received its participation, not directly from syndicate managers, as is the usual proceeding, but through one of the "and associate" combinations of its officers.

Yesterday the fact was shown that not infrequently the whole burden of carrying the personal participation of the "and associates" —that is, of furnishing all the money— was performed by the Equitable, and that the "associates" figured only when the time for the division of profits arrived. Among those who profited in syndicates in which the Equitable participated were the following officers of the company: Senator Chauncey M. Depew; the president, James W. Alexander; the vice-president, James Hazen Hyde, and George H. Squire, of the private "trustee" account and of the various "associates" syndicates

Senator Depew participated in two syndicates, his interest aggregating $150,000. Moreover, in several of those transactions, notably in Chicago and Northwestern, profits apparently due the Equitable had, it seemed, vanished, to be found in some cases in the George H. Squire trustee
account and at other times not to be found at all.

That the Equitable, through Paul Morton, intended to seek civil action in the courts to recover interest wrhere loans had been carried for the officers of the company by the Equitable, was one of the suggestions contained in the testimony of Henry Rogers Winthrop. George H. Squire's successor as financial manager of the Equitable, who was on the stand most of yesterday's session.

ACCOUNTS BADLY TANGLED.

In relation to these syndicate participations through the medium of associates the hopeless, tangled condition of the Equitable records of these affairs was manifest from Mr. Winthrop's testimony. Time and again he testified that expert accountants were still endeavoring to trace the receipt or non-receipt of profits. Not infrequently his only means of showing that the Equitable had participated or was entitled to profits was through calls made on it by syndicate managers for its agreements. Following this up the present management of the Equitable had communicated with the syndicate managers, and from them learned the exact amount of the Equitable's participation and the amount of the profits which the managers had delivered to the company. Then the hunt for the account to which these profits had been transferred began. Sometimes they were found credited to profit and lose, sometimes embodied in the "George H. Squire Trustee" fund, and, in several cases not found at all.

Just how many items of "missing" profits were discovered was a matter of considerable doubt because of the entirely confused state of the Equitable books at the present time.

Two such items in Chicago and Northwestern aggregating $44,000 were disclosed, and items amounting to upward of $100,000 more, which might ultimately have to be placed in this category, were shown.

In view of Jacob H. Schiff's testimony regarding the relation of his firm to the Equitable in bond sales in syndicate agreements, interest was shown in the fact demonstrated yesterday that in several instances the Equitable had definitely paid checks directly to Kuhn. Loeb & Co.

A minor but amusing detail of Equitable management shown in yesterday's proceedings was a clerk loan, recalling the famous $1,000,000 transaction in the name of a $10 a week clerk disclosed in the New-York Life some time ago.

This transaction was for $626,090 in the name of Eugene Barrington, a $2,000 clerk. No record of the loan could be found on the books of the Equitable, and the obvious intention, as shown by the testimony, was to get this amount of the bonds of the Atlantic Coast Line off the books
of the society.

The Equitable Trust Company, which made the loan, charged interest on it, and the only evidence of the loan to be found by the Equitable was the request of the trust company in a letter for the payment of this interest.

Some suspicion was directed toward this transaction, as Mr. Barrington is the clerk who has charge of the advertising expenditures, and these items are being carefully scanned.

The testimony of Mr. Winthrop on the Equitable syndicate operations was not closed last night, nor was that of Henry Greaves, the keeper of the "George H. Squire Trustee" fund. Both will be recalled in the morning session today. The next witness to be called is Jacob H. Schiff. While the committee took no definite action on the point yesterday, both James McKeen, of counsel for the committee, and Ezra P. Prentice the secretary, agreed that both Senators Dryden, of New-Jersey, and Depew would be called. William A. Day. the new controller of the Equitable, and Senator Morgan G. Bulkeley president of the AEtna Life Insurance Company, of Connecticut, were in attendance yesterday.

Managing the Cafe Savarin & The Lawyers' Club

MR. HUGHES: That is all, Mr. Winthrop. Mr. Junk, will you take the stand.

DANIEL M. JUNK, called as a witness,being duly sworn, testified as follows:

BY MR. HUGHES:

Q. Mr. Junk, you are connected with the Cafe Savarin? A. Yes, sir. *

Q. How long have you been connected with it? A. I have been its secretary and treasurer since 1896, the 19th of November.

Q. What is that, a corporation? A. The Savarin, the present Cafe Savarin is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of New York in 1896. It succeeded a New Jersey corporation which was organized in 1890. That in turn succeeded the Societe Anonyme des restaurants aux Stats Unis which was a company formed under the laws of the Republic of France for the purpose of operating the Cafe Savarin.
Q. When was the Societe Anonyme des restaurants aux Stats Unis formed? A. In 1887.

Q. This French corporation which was started in 1887 had what capital? A. I take it from the record and such fragmentary information as has come to my knowledge, that it had a capital of $100,000, approximately, well, about $90,000.

Q. And was that the company that started the Cafe Savarin in the Equitable Building? A. It was.

Q. Do you know who were the stockholders in that company? A. I do not.

Q. Have you any information on that subject? A. Vague.

Q. That company was succeeded by the New Jersey corporation in 1890? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And that New Jersey corporation continued the restaurant business of the Cafe Savarin? A. It did.

Q. What was the stock, total capital stock at that time? A. $100,000.

Q. And who held that? A. It is held by various individuals in their names, but for the benefit of the Equitable Life Assurance Society. Gustav Duval was the president, Robert Stetson was the secretary and treasurer.

Q. Who held the certificates of stock? A. My own knowledge on that subject is gained also from fragmentary information that has come to me from papers that I have seen. It was held partly by General Stahel who was the president, for the Equitable Life Assurance Society. It was in his name but it was deposited with the Mercantile Trust Company for a loan. General Stahel had no personal interest in it whatever.

Q. What was the amount of the loan? A. $88,000.

Q. Who were responsible for the loan? A. Well, the stock of the Savarin Company was deposited as collateral for the loan.

Q. Was there a note? A. A note for $88,000.

Q. Do you know who was on the note? A. I don't know.

Q. Do you know the inception of that loan? I do not.

Q. Or what the money was used for? A. I take it that it was for the equipment and purchase of supplies.

Q. Do you know whether the stock of the New Jersey corporation was paid up? A. The record is that it was.

Q. Was it paid up by turning over the restaurant property of the Societe des Anonyme des restaurants aux Stats Unis? A. The sale by the Societe Anonyme des restaurants aux Stats Unis to the Cafe Savarin Company was that the entire business and assets of that company should be turned over to the New Jersey corporation in consideration of the delivery of the capital stock of the New Jersey company.

Q. And was there a previous loan which was assumed by the New Jersey Company? A.I assume that that loan had been made prior to the formation of the New Jersey company.
Q. It is your best information that it was the money originally borrowed in that way which went to the fitting up of the restaurant? A. It is my impression.

Q. And that money was borrowed from whom? A. The Mercantile Trust Company.

Q. Now, next, in 1896, the New York corporation succeeded the New Jersey corporation with a capital of how much? A. $100,000.

Q. And that capital was made up in what way? A.The New York corporation took over the New Jersey corporation. The stock in the New Jersey corporation was retired and the new stock was issued and substituted for the stock of the New Jersey company.

Q. What was done with the loan? A. The loan passed at various times from the Mercantile Trust Company to the Western National Bank and later to the Equitable Life Assurance Society.

Q. Has it been paid up? A. It has been liquidated down to $25,000.

Q. By whom? A. Out of the Cafe Savarin Company's resources.

3225 - 3229

Q. And that New York corporation has continued to operate the Cafe Savarin from the time of its organization to the present day? A. The New York corporation?

Q. Yes. A. It has.

Q. And the stock of the New York corporation is held by whom? A. In the main, 495 shares are held now in the name of the Equitable Life Assurance Society. There are five qualifying shares for directors. The directors of the company are people who are identified with the Equitable Life Assurance Society.

Q. And the total number of shares is 500? A. 500. The original capital was $100,000, and it was reduced in 1890 to $50,000, the payment being made out of the resources of the Cafe Savarin to the then holder of its obligations.

Q. That is, that capital was reduced and this money paid in the liquidation of the loan held by the Mercantile Trust Company? A. In liquidation of that loan. It was not held by the Mercantile Trust Company at that time.

Q. No individuals profited. by it? A. No individuals profited in any way.

Q. So that from the time of the organization of the New Jersey corporation in 1890 down to the present time the situation has been that either in the name of persons connected with it or in its own name, the Equitable has had all of the stock? A. It has had all the stock and all the benefits.

Q. Of the Cafe Savarin? A. Of the Cafe Savarin Company's receipts.

Q. And is it your information that prior to that the persons interested in the French society were connected with the Equitable? A. Yes, sir, so far as I am able to learn.

Q. It has been an Equitable enterprise? A. It has been an Equitable enterprise from its inception.

O. Is there a lease to the Cafe Savarin? A. There is a lease to old Societe Anonyme des Restaurants aux Stats Unis, bearing date of July 19, 1887.

MR. HUGHES: I offer that in evidence.

(Paper marked Exhibit No. 382.)

THE WITNESS: That was modified

MR. HUGHES: Wait a moment. This lease is dated July 19, 1887, and is made by the Equitable Life Assurance Society to the Societe Anonyme des Restaurants aux Unis, and it leases certain premises described, the lease to begin on the first day of August, 1887, and to continue for twenty years, until August 1, 1907.

It provides or contains the covenant:

First—That the parties of the second part will carry on a first-class restaurant, dining-room and cafe, according to law. That they shall hold the party of the first part harmless from all damages that may be incurred on account of the business, and that no other business shall be carried on in such rooms than that above named.

Second—That the parties of the second part shall provide all employees' plate, linen, cutlery, kitchen utensils, and other things necessary for conducting the business. They shall also provide such waiters, plate and linen, and so forth, as necessary in fitting up the rooms to be occupied by the Lawyers' Downtown Club, and by the Underwriters' Club, which may be located in said building.

Third—As to the removal of ashes, garbage and so forth.

Fourth—Provides that the parties of the second part will pay to the party of the first part, as a rental for said premises annually, a sum which shall be equal to fifteen per cent. of the gross amount which shall be received by the parties of the second part in the conduct of their business in said building, including all receipts from the clubs herein named. That they will keep an account of all receipts from every source. Suitable books shall be kept, open to the party of the first part at stated times. That the party of the first part shall pay the said rental, equal in amount to fifteen per cent. of the gross receipts, on the first days of August, November, February and May, in quarterly payments. That the receipts for wines or liquors shall not be embraced or considered as part of the receipts. That such sales by said parties of the second part in the case or cask are to be allowed as a private business of their own.

Fifth—That they shall furnish a proper, substantial and wholesome meal for the clerks of the party of the first part, for the sum of fifty cents for each meal, the number of employees to be about one hundred.

Sixth—That the parties of the second part shall furnish to the Lawyers' Downtown Club, and to the Underwriters' Club, who shall have rooms in such building, all such supplies, meals, or refreshments as shall be required.

Seventh: That they shall avoid interference with tenants or occupants of the building.

Eighth: That they shall not assign or sublet.

Ninth: That there shall be an arbitration of differences.

Tenth: Access to books.

Eleventh: Surrender of premises.

THE WITNESS: It was modified by this lease (handing paper).

Q. The lease you now show me was a modification under date of May 1, 1888? A. Yes.

MR. HUGHES: I offer it in evidence.

(Paper marked Exhibit No. 383.)

(Exhibit No. 383 will be found in the Book of Exhibits.)

MR. HUGHES: This was a lease made May 1, 1888, between the same parties, reciting the former lease and providing for a modification.

Q. Just point out the modification. A. The modification was as to the rent particularly, and as to additional space.

MR. HUGHES: The modification consists in additional space.

THE WITNESS: And there was a stipulated rental there of an amount per annum instead of fifteen per cent.

Q. Will you point it out? A. I think it is on the first page, Mr. Hughes.

MR. HUGHES: The modification consists in the leasing of additional space, and for a fixed sum as rental, to wit, fifty thousand dollars a year, as a fair and proper rent for the premises above described, unfurnished and in consideration of the extraordinary expense of the lessor in fitting and furnishing the said premises for the business of a cafe, and premises, the further annual rent of six thousand dollars, making a total annual rent of fifty-six thousand dollars. The term is stated as twenty years from May 1, 1888, to May 1, 1908.

Q. The covenants are the same? A. Practically the same. There was a further modification.

Q. Where is that? A. That is in this, a third instrument.

MR. HUGHES: Also a modification as to the amount to be paid for meals ordered for the clerks of the lessor, fixing the price at sixty cents.

Q. I think those are all in this paper, are they not? A. In that paper, yes. Here is another, April 7, 1891.

MR. HUGHES: I offer that in evidence.

(Paper marked Exhibit No. 384.)

(Exhibit No. 384, will be found in the Book of Exhibits.)

MR. HUGHES: This agreement is dated April, 7, 1891, between the Equitable Life Assurance Society and the Cafe Savarin Company.

Q. This is the New Jersey corporation? A. Yes, sir.

MR. HUGHES: It provides as follows, after reciting the agreement of May, 1888, the party of the second part out of its gross receipts in its business shall pay all expenses connected with the conduct thereof, including the expenses connected with the Lawyers' Club, and after such payment shall pay to the party of the first part the whole amount of its net

3230 - 3234
receipts from the said business except so much thereof as shall be necessary from time to time to pay the interest upon a certain note held by the Mercantile Trust Company made by J. Stahel, February 15, 1890, for the sum of $88,000, the interest on said note to be paid out of said net receipts. As security for the payment of said note one thousand shares of the capital stock of the said Cafe Savarin Comany were pledged to the holder of said note. The amount so paid as interest upon said note is to be taken and held to be a dividend upon the said stock so pledged for the payment of said note. Supplementary to this is a memorandum as follows:

"Memorandum to John Stahel. In accordance with the new agreement made by the Equitable Life Assurance Society and the Cafe Savarin Company on the 7th day of April, 1891, you are hereby authorized to see that 75 per cent. of the Lawyers' Club dues are turned over regularly every month to the Cafe Savarin Company, who will under the above referred to agreement defray all the Lawyers' Club expenses for waiters, kitchen, and so forth. You will also see that the balance on hand from the remaining 25 per cent. of the members' dues and which under the agreement with the Lawyers' Club is disbursed by the Lawyers' Club house committee, is also turned over to the Cafe Savarin at the end of every six months. You are further directed to see that the Cafe Savarin will at the end of every six months turn over to the Equitable Life Assurance Society as rent, the profits of the Cafe Savarin together with the profits of the Lawyers' Club arising out of the 75 and 25 per cent. account.

(Signed) Henry B. Hyde.

April 7, 1901."

Q. What is the next lease? A. Have you the Lawyers' Club lease?

Q. Is that the last? A. That is the last of the New Jersey corporation.

Q. When the New York corporation was formed in 1896 it took over this lease as one of the assets of the New Jersey corporation? A. Yes.

Q. And it is now in possession of the premises described pursuant to this lease? A. The New York corporation?

Q. Yes. A. Yes.

Q. The premises covered by this lease include that part of the Equitable Building occupied by the Lawyers' Club? A. They do—well, not in that lease, no, I beg your pardon. The two taken together with the Lawyers' Club.

Q. These leases I have thus far read do not include the space occupied by the Lawyers' Club? A. No, sir.

Q. Was there a separate lease made to the Lawyers' Club? A. There was.

(Producing paper.)

MR. HUGHES: I offer that paper in evidence.

(Paper marked Exhibit 385.)

(EXHIBIT 385, will be found in the book of Exhibits.)

MR. HUGHES: This is a lease dated, January 1, 1888, between the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States and the Lawyers' Downtown Club, a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of New York, for the term of twenty years. It contains the .following provision in substance.

First. The Society agrees at its own cost and expense to decorate, paint, carpet, and furnish the club room and maintain the same in a thorough, complete, and elegant style.

Second. To keep the club rooms and all the furniture and decorations in good order and repair.

Third. That the tenant of the public restaurant in the Equitable building and the kitchen and other premises appurtenant thereto shall furnish for the members of the Club and their guests during certain hours, meals and so forth of a quality which shall be first class and so forth and all necessary service.

THE WITNESS: There is a stipulation regarding the difference in the bill of fare prices.

MR. HUGHES: And it shall be provided that the prices shall be at least ten per cent. below the usual card prices charged in the public restaurant in the basement. That the service shall include all necessary servants and all linen, china and so forth incident to the maintenance of the Club, and in consideration thereof the Club is not to permit any other party to cater for it as long as the Society fulfils the terms of the agreement and the supplies and service are satisfactory to the governors of the Club.

Fourth. The Society agrees to furnish electric light, gas and heat and that the janitor of the Equitable Building shall keep the club windows in order and care for fires, and so forth.

Fifth. That if during the term of the lease the tenant of the public restaurant shall fail to properly furnish the Club as above provided, in that event the Society agrees to furnish in some convenient portion of the Equitable Building such kitchen and laundry accomodations, appointments and so forth for the exclusive use of the Club, and to pay any deficiency out of the rental herein referred to.

Sixth. The Society agrees that it will use the space marked upon the annexed diagram library, for the library known as the Equitable law library, and that every member of the Club shall during the term of his membership have a right to enter the library and use the books subject to the rules and regulations in regard to the same, that may be made by the Library Committee.

The lease then provides that it is upon the following conditions:

First. The Club agrees that it will pay as rental to the Society 75 per cent. of the dues as now prescribed in the Bylaws and collected from its members as the same shall be received and out of the balance of said dues it will after paying all proper expenses incident to the maintenance and management of the club including all supplies in the nature of stationery, newspapers, periodicals, liveries, salaries of superintendent and assistants and such other expenses as may be regarded by the governors of this club or a majority thereof as proper and necessary, and the club agrees to pay over to the Society any unexpended balance of said dues remaining at the end of each year during the continuance of the lease.

Second. The club agrees that during the term of the lease the portion of the building set aside for its use will only be used for the purposes of a first class club establishment.

Third. That the club will not let or underlet the rooms or any part thereof. That it will keep books of account of receipts and expenditures open to the president or vice-president of the Society or any other person authorized by them.

Fourth. The club agrees it will use all reasonable means to keep its membership at all times during the time of this lease to the number of 600 and dues as now prescribed by the Bylaws.

Fifth. It it further agreed that in consideration of One dollar and the premises the Society shall not hold any of the officers, governors or members of the club in any way liable for anything under this arrangement.

It is further agreed that the dues from the members shall date from the first day of January, 1888, and thereafter the annual dues shall be due and payable on the first days of January and July.

Then follows a diagram of the premises.

Q. Are there any further agreements relative to the management of the Cafe Savarin or the Lawyers' Club? A. The Cafe Savarin took certain space formerly occupied by the Mercantile Safe Deposit Company, in 1890. I think it was February 28, 1890 (handing paper).

Q. And this is the agreement relating to that space? A. It is.

MR. HUGHES: I offer it in evidence.

(Paper marked Exhibit 386.)

(EXHIBIT 386, will be found in the Book of Exhibits.)

THE WITNESS: That is a copy. I do not have the original.

3235 - 3239
MR. HUGHES: This is an indenture, dated, February 28, 1890, between the Equitable Life Assurance Society, the Mercantile Safe Deposit Company and the Cafe Savarin Company. It provides for a lease by the Mercantile Safe Deposit Company to the Cafe Savarin Company subject to the conditions of the lease between the Equitable Life Assurance Society and the Mercantile Safe Deposit Company of certain portions of the latter's premises in the Equitable building.

THE WITNESS: That has been brought down to date by extensions.

Q. And this practice outlined in the agreement with the Cafe Savarin and Lawyers' Club has been maintained, to wit, that the Lawyers' Club pays over to the Cafe Savarin 75 per cent. of its dues? A. That was modified in 1892, whereby the Cafe Savarin Company takes all the receipts of the Lawyers' Club and pays all its expenses and turns the unexpended balance over to the Society.

Q. Have you that agreement? A. It looks as though I did not have it here. Inadvertently I have left that behind.

Q. That is provided for here? A. It is the same thing in effect as the original papers provide for, because you will notice that while they paid over 75 per cent at first, after paying expenses as stipulated in the 25 per cent., they turned over the balance to the Cafe Savarin or to the Equitable Life Assurance Society.

Q. What expenses does the Lawyers' Club meet then? A. At the present time none except through us.

Q. When you say through us, you mean through the Cafe Savarin? A. The Cafe Savarin takes all the receipts of the Lawyers' Club and pays all its expenses, including cost of supplies furnished, help and expenses of every other character or nature whatever.

Q. And it also takes all its own receipts and pays all its own expenses? A. Yes.

Q. And then the net balance that remains, whether of Lawyers' Club's operations or Cafe Savarin operations, is paid over as rent to the Equitable? A. To the Equitable.

Q. Is there any deduction in order to pay dividends? A. In the records of the company there appears but two years in which dividends were paid, and the word dividend is a misnomer. Those dividends were declared for the purpose of paying interest on the obligation of $88,000 held by the Mercantile Trust Company. That is a recapitulation of our receipts and expenses since the year 1881 (handing paper).

Q. This paper? A. Yes.

Q. Do these totals include the expenses of the Lawyers' Club? A. They do.

MR. HUGHES: I offer that paper in evidence.

(Paper marked Exhibit 387.)

Q. The first column in this paper is headed Dues. That means Lawyers' Club dues? A. Yes.

Q. The second column is headed receipts. What does that mean? A. That is the entire receipts, which includes the dues.

Q. The next is supplies and expenses? A. That is all disbursements of every character.

Q. Profits is the difference between the two columns? A. Yes.

Q. And then the rents is the amount of that paid to the Equitable? A. Paid to the Equitable.

Q. And in the next column is an amount in 1891 paid to the Mercantile Safe Deposit Company? A. That was the only year, that year and I think the year before, but the record of the year before I would not undertake to furnish any evidence regarding.

Q. And the next in the way of dividends are items of interest apparently? A. Items of interest. They should be characterized as items of interest, although they appear as dividends.

Q. In other years they were under the head of expenses? A. Yes.

Q. And the final column, Debt Cancelled, is the amount applied on the loan to the Mercantile Trust Company? A. Various obligations, not only of that but there was another obligation of about $62,000 with the $88,000 one. All that debt has been liquidated down to $25,000.

MR. HUGHES: This will be spread upon the record at this point. I will simply note for the information of the Committee that the net profits which are here stated under the head of rents from all operations appear to have been in the last few years as follows:

1898 $115,000

1899 $105,000

and in addition $40,334.39.

THE WITNESS: To the liquidation of the loan, yes.

MR. HUGHES: Applied to the liquidation of the loan. In the year 1900, $90,000 and $50,000 applied to the liquidation of the loan; 1901, $105,000 and $13,180.41 applied to the liquidation of the loan. In 1902, $110,000; in 1903, $110,000; 1904, $140,000.

Q. These amounts that were applied to the liquidation of loans in the years mentioned were applied out of this amount as rent or in addition? A. Partly out of the earnings and partly out of resources.

Q. What resources were they aside from the earnings? A. Well, we had more capital than we required.

Q. You mean the fifty thousand dollars that was applied in 1900? A. Yes.

Q. Take the forty thousand dollars applied in 1899, was that paid out of the one hundred and five thousand? A. Out of the $146,941.75.

Q. Out of the $146,941.75 profit? A. Yes, $105,000 applied to rental and $40,000 applied to the liquidation of the loan, partial liquidation.

Q. What was done with the difference between profits in the years 1902, 1903 and 1904, and the amount stated to have been paid in the way of rent? A. That is explained in this foot note. There were small balances that could not be adjusted during the year, and they were carried into the rent account which was an obligation of the company to the Equitable Life Assurance Society. That obligation stands at present approximately $25,000. I do not know the exact amount, but it is an obligation of the company to the Society, and can be adjusted at any time upon demand.

Q. Do the Equitable or the Cafe Savarin have anything to do with the introduction of members into the Lawyers' Club? A. That is handled by the governors of the Club.

Q. The Equitable and the Cafe Savarin Company merely have to do with the A. Operation.

Q. The expenses and operations of the Club? A. Yes, sir.

Q. But the club governors and membership is in the control of the club through its governors? A. Yes.

MR. COX: What is that club, is it a separate organization or corporation?

THE WITNESS: It is an association.

Q. It was formed under the Act relating to social organizations. A. Formed in 1888, I believe. Up to the present year we have earned up to the end of October a hundred and seventy-four thousand and some odd dollars. Our total receipts for the ten months ending October 31, 1905, were $658,246.35. The expenses in that time and disbursements have been $404,062.03, leaving an amount of earnings applicable to rent of $174,184.28.

BY THE CHAIRMAN:
Q. That does not include any dues from the Club? A. It does include them.

BY MR. HUGHES:
Q. That is the receipts after deducting all dues from the club, receipts from the restaurant, deducting expenses? A. Yes, that leaves——

Q. That is up until November 1st? A. That is up until November 1st. Of that amount $150,000 has been paid over to the Equitable in lieu of rent.

BY MR. COX:
Q. Why is the large increase in the net earnings as compared with the former years? A. I am afraid I might be considered egotistical if I told you. A little economy in the management.

Q. Is there any other information in regard to the Cafe Savarin or the Equitable's relation to it that you have at your

3240 - 3244
hand, or have we the whole story? A. I will not volunteer, but I am here to tell you anything you desire.

Q. Is there anything further with regard to matters received by the Equitable which you can state? A. I covered everything in my tabulation.

Q. Is there anything in regard to expenses incurred by the Equitable which you have not stated? A. Unless you considered my own salary possibly. I am attached to the cashier's department of the Equitable Life Assurance Society.

Q. What is the personal management of the Cafe Savarin? A. The directorate is composed of Judge William A. Day, James F. Wilson, Mr. Louis M. Bailey, and George V. Turner and myself.

Q. Who is the president of the Cafe Savarin Company? A. James F. Wilson.

Q. Does he get any salary? A. Not from the Savarin. His labor is purely that of love.

Q. Does he get anything for his love? A. Well, I mean so far as the Savarin is concerned.

Q. Does he get anything from the Equitable? A. Yes, that is, he is like myself, an Equitable employe.

Q. Do you get a salary from the Equitable? A. I do.

Q. Do you get anything from the Cafe Savarin? A. I do not.

Q. Do any of the officers of the Cafe Savarin get anything from the Cafe Savarin? A. They do not, sir.

Q. They are paid by the Equitable? A. Yes, sir.

Q. What is total amount of the salary paid to those who are in the Savarin management, paid by the Equitable Society? A. I am not in a position to state. I know my own, of course.

Q. You don't know the others? A. No.

Q. Then if you will give me the names I will find out. A. Mr. James F. Wilson is the only one that performs any active duty.

Q. Besides Mr. James F. Wilson and yourself, is there any one connected with the Savarin Society or with the management that gets any money from the Equitable Life? A. Well, not as a consideration for their duties in the Savarin. They are all men who are actively engaged in departments in the Equitable, where they perform a sufficient amount of service to warrant the salary they get. I personally perform more service for the Equitable than I do for the Savarin.

Q. You do this because of your relation to the Equitable? A. Yes.

Q. Is there any executive officer of the Equitable that is paid out of the receipts of the Cafe Savarin? A. Absolutely none.

Q. Any director of the Equitable paid out of the receipts of the Cafe Savarin business? A. No, sir. There is no benefit derived in any way whatever from the restaurant business.

Q. In order that we may know just what the net amount is received by the Equitable from the operation of the Cafe Savarin Company, which stands to it in lieu of rent, inasmuch as the salaries of the executive officers of the Cafe Savarin Company are paid by the Equitable, I should like to have a statement of that. A. I will endeavor to furnish that, or I will ask for it at least, from the authorities of the Equitable.

Q. Does the Cafe Savarin Company furnish lunches to any persons connected with the Equitable free of charge? A. They do not.

Q. Or any supplies of any sort? A. They do not.

Q. Those two are officers or directors or otherwise connected with the Equitable except under this provision for the giving of lunches to clerks, pay for what they get? A. They pay for what they get.

Q. At the same rate as others pay? A. Yes.

BY MR. COX:
Q. Has that always been so? A. That has always been so.

Nov. 16, 1905, New-York Daily Tribune,

Nov. 16, 1905, New-York Daily Tribune, HARRIMAN ANSWERS HYDE
Page 1, Column 1,

ODELL ON STAND SOON.

Charge About Settlement of His Suit Flatly Contradicted.

The following are the points on which E. H. Harriman, under oath, flatly contradicted the sworn testimony of james hazen Hyde before the Legislative Insurance Committee yesterday:

First---That the Mercantile Trust Company settled for $75,000 ex-Governor Odell's Shipbuilding suit on his advice.
Second---That he ever advised Mr. Hyde to settle the suit to avoid retaliatory legislative action repealing the charter of the Mercantile Trust Company.
Third--That he ever heard of any legislation for the repeal of this charter, concerning which
Mr. Hyde swore he had admonished him.
Fourth--That he ever suggested Mr. Hyde's appointment as French Ambassador until appealed to for help by Hyde.

On these additional points in Mr. Hyde's testimony Mr. Harriman interposed contradictions, while confirming a portion of the testimony of the former:

First--That he advised Mr. Hyde not to sell his stock in the Equitable. Mr. Harriman admitted the advice, but declared he acted as a friend anxious to help, not desiring "to knife him in the back."
Second--That he had advised Mr. Hyde to move the adoption of the Frick report, knowing the former was ignorant of its contents, Mr. Harriman conceded this, but declared he was seeking to befriend "the young man," and had offered if he did to "stand by him through thick and thin."
Third--That he had spoken to President Roosevelt about Mr. Hyde's appointment as Ambassador to France. Mr. Harriman confirmed this, but insisted he had not recommended the appointment, declining to give his reasons for this position.
Fourth--That he had advised secrecy regarding the Union Pacific "blind pool," but had not forbidden Mr. Hyde to explain the matter to the executive committee of the Equitable.

It was also brought out that the Ambler bill repealing the charter of the Mercantile Trust Company, had been introduced in the legislature of 1904, in March, while the Odell settlement was not made until December of the same year, months after the legislature had adjourned and just before the end of Governor Odell's term.

Mr. Hyde attempted to meet this point by declaring that he feared ex-Governor Odell's influence on the incoming legislature.

Striking instances of apparent profit made by the Squires by the purchase from and resale to the Equitable of securities were shown, one transaction indicating a profit of $18,000.

James Hazen Hyde testified that four offers for his Equitable stock made by George J. Gould, H.C. Frick, E.H. Harriman and Gage E. Tarbell antedated the Ryan offer which was accepted.

THE ISSUE CLEAR CUT.

Committee Refuses to Go Into Question of Opponents' Veracity.

The truth or falsity of the sweeping charges made by James Hazen Hyde against ex-Governor Odell on Tuesday now rests entirely on a question of veracity between Mr. Hyde and E.H. Harriman. In the most dramatic session of the insurance committee Mr. Harriman yesterday specifically contradicted every one of the accusations made by Hyde.

Just before Mr. Harriman left the stand there was the nearest approach to a wrangle that has occurred since the committee began its sessions. Apparently provoked by Mr. Harriman's flat contradiction of his client's testimony, Samuel Untermyer, Mr. Hyde's counsel, rose and demanded permission to cross examine Mr. Harriman. There was a long consultation of the committee. Then the request was denied by Senator Armstrong. The denial was entirely consistent wiith the course followed by the committee since it began its work. Opportunity was offered Mr. Untermyer to put any questions pertinent to the real purpose of the commission through Mr. Hughes. Again Mr. Untermyer protested and attempted to ask a question of Mr. Harriman.

Senator Armstrong intervened and directed Mr. Harriman not to answer the questien. Then Mr. Unternyer put several questions through mr. Hughes and subsided. After the hearing he renewed his protest and was then told that if had any material questions which might be put by Mr. Hughes he would be permitted to follow this course, but that he could not cross examine a witness. Senator Armstrong, supported by his associates, took the ground that the question of personal veracity between the two witnesses was not one that the committee could deal with.

With reference to the strength of Mr. Hyde's charge that he feared the efforts of Governor Odell, expressed in retaliatory legislation, the evidence yesterday developed one damaging fact. The Ambler bill repealing the Mercantile Trust Company's charter was introduced in March. The settlement was not made in the Odell suit until the following December, just before Governor Odell's term expired and while the legislature was not in session. Assemblyman Rogers, impressed with the fact and failing to see any basis in fact for any part of Hyde's charge about retaliatory legislation, asked:

"What danger of possible legislation could have in the slightest degree influenced you, when no legislature was in session?"

"There was a legislature to be in session."

"But Governor Odell, who you claim was the man you feared, was going out of office on December 31."

"People out of office are sometimes more influential than when in office."

HARRIMAN ON STAND.

Denial of Hyde's Important Testimony Unequivocal.

The appearance of Mr. Harriman was greeted with the largest crowd of the sessions. While Mr. Hughes examined the witness on preliminary matters the crowd waited anxiously for its sensation. James Hazen Hyde, who watched Mr. Harriman with evident traces of nervousness. shifted uneasily and clasped and unclasped his hands as Mr. Hughes approached the critical point. Mr. Harriman, on the contrary, was absolutely calm. Some surprise was excited by the suggestion contained in Mr. Hughes's examination that a condition in the settlement of the Odell suit had been ex-Governor Odell's advocacy of Mr. Hyde's appointment as Ambassador to France. Mr. Harriman denied all knowledge of this. The examination regarding the Odell suit follows:

Q.--Testimony has been received here as to an interview between you and Mr. Hyde with reference to the settlement of governor Odell's claim against Mercantile Trust Company growing out of his purchase of bonds of the United States Shipbuilding Company. Did you have such an interview?
A.--Yes. Now, Mr. Hughes, may I make a statement? I have not read any of the evidence given by any other witness, so that my mind is entirely fresh on these subjects, without any prejudice.
Q.--Then before I call your attention to statements which have been made, which I shall do later, I will ask you to give us the benefit of your recollection as to any transactions with Mr. Hyde or others relating to the settlement of Governor Odell's suit.
A.--Mr. Hyde came to me--I am not sure, but I think Mr. Deming also; whether they were together or separately I don't recollect--and asked me if I could not use my influence to try to get Governor Odell to settle that suit.
Q.--When was that?
A.--That must have been, now me see---I have had something else to think about beside Equitable matters, as you probably realize--I think it was some time last winter.
Q.--Was it not in the spring of 1904 or summer of 1904?
A.--No, I think it was last autumn or last winter. It may have been in the summer. It is not tied to my recollection.---
Q.--Well, the date we may be able to supply a little later. Perhaps you can fix this conversation with some reference to the time of the settlement. How long was it before that?
A.--I think it was about a month before I understood the settlement was made.

MR. HARRIMAN'S STATEMENT.

Q.--Now if you will, go on please, and state what took place.
A.--Mr. Hyde's statement to me was that the Odell suit was dangerous to the Mercantile Trust Company, in that it might induce other suits to be brought by other people that had been subscribers to the shipbuilding combination. I agreed with Mr. Hyde that I would see Governor Odell, which I did, and arranged an interview between them, which took place in one of the rooms of my office. I was not present and knew nothing about the conversation that took place between Governor Odell and Mr. Hyde, and I think Mr. Colby was with them; and the only thing I know about this conversation was that when Governor Odell came out of the room he asked me who Mr. Colby was, and I did not then know exactly, but I told him I believed he had something to do with the law department of the Equitable. He said: "It seems very strange; he is the whole Equitable, and Mr. Hyde is nothing; he was the man that stated what they would or would not do." It seemed to have irritated him. That is all I had to do with it for some time. I was finally approached again some days after that by Mr Hyde and Mr. Colby, who came to my office and stated that they still desired to get this matter out of the way, and Mr. Colby's remark to me was: "I want you to understand, Mr. Harriman, that my offer, my first offer, is my best." What he meant by that I don't know. To this I made no reply, but I told Mr. Hyde that I would again see Governor Odell and try to get him to do something about settling the suit, and finally--I don't remember whether any figure was named to me or not, but they had another interview. I think somewhere uptown, perhaps at my house, at which I was not present, because I did not want to have anything to do with it, and in the end Mr. Hyde told me that they were willing to pay $70,000, and would not I try to get Governor Odell to accept that amount, which I did. As I recollect it, Governor Odell told me that if I specially desired it he would do so. Well, I told him that I did not want to be put in that position. He went into some details, that he would have to pay lawyers' fees out of it, and that, anyway, if I specially requested he would. I told Mr. Hyde of that interview and said to him that if I were in his place and were going to settle it, although I had no advice to give as to whether it should be settled or not, I would not stand on $75,000 on a settlement of that kind. I would make it satisfactory. And I understood afterward that Mr. Hyde saw him and the payment was made, of which I had no further knowledge.
Q.--How long was it after the interview you had first with Mr. Hyde when Mr. Hyde and Mr. Colby met Governor Odell at your office?
A,--I don't remember. It must have been within a few days or a week.
Q.--How long was it after that time when you were approached again by Mr. Colby?
A.--I cannot remember that. It was a short time.
Q.--Was it within a short time?
A.--It was all within a week or so.
Q.--And the interview which was subsequently had between Mr. Hyde and Mr. Colby and Governor Odell, was that at your house or at a club?
A.--I don't remember any interview after the one had in my office between Mr. Hyde and Mr. Colby and Governor Odell. I don't know that Mr. Colby was present at any other meetings between those people.
Q.--Then the subsequent interview, which you first thought was at your house, was an interview between Mr. Hyde and Governor Odell?
A.--That is as I recollect it.
Q.--Was that at your house or at a club?
A.--I don't recollect. Now, I don't know. I don't recollect any meeting that was held at a club.

MAKES FLAT CONTRADICTIONS.

Q.--Did you say anything to Mr. Hyde in any of these interviews as to the desirability of settling the suit because of the power that might be exercised against the company at Albany?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--Did you make any mention to Mr. Hyde of any attempt that had been or might be made to repeal the charter of the Mercantile Trust Company?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--Did you refer at all to any advantage to the company in settling the suit to avoid an attack upon it?
A.--No, sir. In fact, I specifically told Mr. Hyde that I did not know anything about the merits of it.
Q.--That is the merits of the claim, the contention?
A.--I did not know anything about it.
Q.--Did you give advice to Mr. Hyde as to whether it should or should not be settled?
A.--None whatever, other than I have stated about the matter of not standing for the $5,000.
Q.--Or to Mr. Colby?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--Did Governor Odell request you to use your influence to obtain a settlement of the claim?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--Then from your testimony we are to understand Governor Odell had no interview with you to set you in motion?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--To procure a settlement of the claim?
A.--No.
Q.--But that the request for the settlement came exclusively from Mr. Hyde?
A.--Yes, sir.
Q.--Mr. Hyde has testified as follows, referring to this claim: "Q.--Did Mr. Harriman ever suggest to you that the claim be settled? A.--Yes, sir; he suggested to me that there was then a great deal of rumor in the newspapers that an effort would be made to repeal the charter of the Mercantile Trust Company, which was a valuable charter, and the Equitable Life has a very large investment in the company." Did you suggest or state that to Mr. Hyde?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--At any time?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--The further question was asked: "Q.--Explain what you mean by the repeal of the charter? A.--I mean exactly what I say," and a further answer: "I suppose he," referring to you, "feared retaliatory measures on the part of that powerful gentleman."
Q.--Why should you suppose so?
A.--I don't know; he seemed to think so.
Q.--In what form was that suggestion made?
A.--In just that naked form.
Q.--Well, that there was danger that the charter would be repealed?
A.--Yes, sir
Q.--Did you make any statement in part or in substance, directly or indirectly of that sort?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--To Mr. Hyde?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--At any time?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--The further question was asked of Mr. Hyde: "Q.--I want you to state what Mr. Harriman said as definitely as you can. A.--He said there was a possiblity of that powerful interest at Albany doing harm, being antagonistic on account of this shipbuilding loss, doing harm to one of the valuable assets of the Equitable, which was the Mercantile Trust." Did you say that?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--In substance or in any way?
A.--No, sir, in no way whatever.
Q.--It was further testified: "Q.--Did he say anything specifically as to the repeal of the charter? A.--Yes, sir he mentioned that as a possibility. Q.--By legislation? A.--Yes, sir, and it was also rumored in the newspapers." Did you say anything to him to that effect?
A.--No, sir.

DID NOT KNOW OF SUIT.

Q.--I thought I had asked you this, but it is suggested to me that I have not. Did you know of any rumor that there was a bill introduced to repeal the charter of the Mercantile Trust Company?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--Or that there was to be such an effort made?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--It appears here in evidence that a bill had been introduced in March, 1904, in both the Senate and Assembly to repeal the charter of the Fire-proof Warehousing Company and the acts amendatory thereof, which were the charter and acts authorizing the Mercantile Trust Company to do business. Did you ever hear anything about the introduction of that measure?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--Did you have any interviews with Mr. Hyde as to his being appointed to Ambassador to France?
A.--Yes.
Q.--When was that?
A.--I think it was about a year ago.
Q.--What led to those interviews?
A.--Mr. Hyde came to me and asked me to use my influence in trying to have him appointed.
Q.--Had you ever said anything to him or any one connected with him on that subject?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--State whether or not it had previously been present in your mind or suggested to you by any one?
A.--I think the first---let me correct that answer that I made. I think Mr. McIntyre was the first one that came to me about it.
Q.--That was the first intimation to you of such a matter?
A.--Yes. sir.
Q.--And did you have any interviews with any one else before Mr. Hyde spoke to you about it?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--What did you say to Mr. Hyde as to who you would do in the matter?
A.--I told him that when I saw the President I would speak to him about it.
Q.--Did you do so?
A.--Yes, sir.
Q..Did you recommend him?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--Do you know whether Governor Odell did anything with regard to the procuring of such an appointment?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--Do you know whether he visited the President with reference to it?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--Was the time when this matter was brought up between you and Mr. Hyde at or near the time when the matter of Governor Odell's claim against the Mercantile Trust Company was under consideration?
A.--I don't remember that there was a connection between them in any way whatever.
Q.--I am advised that the date of the settlement of Governor Odell's claim, or rather the date of appointment, was December 30, 1904. I don't know as to the accuracy of it. It is a statement purporting to come from the company.
A.--Well, it must have been about a year ago, as my recollection was at first.
Q.--When were these interviews with regard to the ambassadorial appointment?
A.--I sbould think they were about a year ago; I think I stated that before, did I not?
Q.--That was my recollectlon.
A.--Yes.
Q.--State whether or not there was any connection between the two?
A.--There was none.
Q.--Did you go to see the President immediately after the settlement of the suit of Governor Odell?
A.--I don't remember.
Q.--Can you fix the date of that business?
A.--Some time in the autumn of 1904. I did not go to see the President specifically on that subject.
Q.--You mentioned the matter or said you would mention the matter when you did see him?
A.--Yes.

Subsequently Mr. Hughes again referred to the date of the conference as follows:

Q.--It appears that the bill to repeal the charter of the Mercantile Trust Company was introduced in March---on March 31, 1900. Now, did you have any interview with Mr. Hyde or Mr. Colby, or with Governor Odell, or any one relative to the settlement of Governor Odell's claim against the Mercantile Trust Company, prior to the adjournment of the legislature in 1904?
A.--No. sir.
Q.--Which, I suppose, took place about May 9, or early in May.
The Chairman---Much earlier---April 23, or earlier.
Q.--April 23, 1904---you had no such interview?
A.--No. sir.
The Chairman---I understood you to say that the earliest interview you had on that subject was along in the autumn?
A.--About a year ago, in the autumn.
Mr. Hughes---Are we to understand that your first interview with regard to that settlement of Governor Odell's suit was in the fall of 1904?
A.--Yes, sir.
Q.--And if the date of settlement is correctly given to me as December 30th--date of payment was December 30th, 1904, how long prior to that time was the matter first called to your attention?
A.--May have been a month or two months.
Q.--Do you know whether or not the payment was made immediately upon the settlement?
A.--I don't know.
Q.--It is suggested to me that it was made several months later; is that the fact?
A.--That I don't know.
Q.--If you will be good enough to search your memory and tell me about the date when the interview took place between Mr. Hyde and Governor Odell uptown, either at your house or at a club, when I understand the matter was suggested?
A.--Well, I think it was a short time after the first interview they had in my offlce downtown.

TELLS OF FRICK REPORT. Page 3, Column 2,

Asked Hyde to Move Its Adoption from Friendly Motives.

Mr. Harriman's testimony regarding his advice to Mr. Hyde to move the adoption of the Frick report tallied more nearly with Mr. Hyde's testimony than that on any other point, but he insisted that he had advised this out of friendship for "the young man," and ridiculed the notion that there was any attempt "to knife" Hyde. In this testimony he attacked Mr. Hyde's testimony about a "conspiracy and cabal" to deprive Hyde of his property, just as in the preceding reference to the Ambassador incident he maintained that Hyde had come to him, instead of his going to Hyde, and that his effort throughout had been to help Hyde and not to injure him, get him out of the country or ruin his property. Mr. Harriman here denied the declaration of Mr. Hyde that he had offered to buy the Hyde stock in the Equitable.
The testimony on the Frick report follows:

Q.--Did you ask Mr. Hyde to move the adoption of the Frick report?
A.--Yes, sir.
Q.--What did you say to him about that, and what did he say to you?
A.--I not only said that to Mr. Hyde, but I also said it to Mr. Gulliver. I had been befriending Mr. Hyde during the attacks that were being made upon him, and the attempts to oust him from the Equitable by the other antagonistic interests to him, and I told Mr. Gulliver several days before the Frick report was presented that I wished he would tell Mr. Hyde from me that if I were in his place, as a friend of his, I would favor the adoption of that report, and ever to the extent of moving its adoption; that if he did I would stand by him through thick and thin and that I believed that every other independent, conservative man on the board would that he could state that the methods which he had pursued had been those which he found in existence when he went into the society, and that he was young and inexperienced, and that he had pursued them, and that he was sorry, and that if he were given an opportunity in the future to retrieve himself he hoped the board would do so, and that I believed that there would be a feeling toward him because of his youth and inexperience, that he should have some chance to retrieve his position.
Q.--What reply was made to that?
A.--Mr. Gulliver, as I recollect, told me that he would not advise that, but he would give that message to Mr. Hyde.
Q.--Have you stated---
A.--Now, one minute. Do you want to know what Mr. Hyde's answer was?
Q.--Yes?
A.--Mr. Hyde came to my office the day before the Frick report was presented, and I then repeated that same opinion to him, and he objected in some form or other, not very strenuously.
Q.--Had you prior to the appointment of the Frick committee advised Mr. Hyde or stated to Mr. Gulliver that it would be a good thing to have such a committee appointed?
A.--I not only stated that---I may not have stated that to them, no, sir, but I did state to members of the board almost at the first inception of the charges that were made by the Alexander faction.
Q.--Did you state to Mr. Gulliver that the Frick committee would be favorable to Mr. Hyde?
A.--No.
Q.--Did you say in substance that you expected that its action would be favorable to him?
A.--No. sir.
Q.--Did you in any way directly or indirectly, by statement to Mr. Gulliver or Mr. Hyde or any other person say anything which would indicate that the proceedings of the Frick committee or its report would be favorable to Mr. Hyde?
A.--No, sir.

DID NOT TRY TO GET STOCK.

Q.--Were you concerned with any offer to Mr. Hyde for the purchase of his stock?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--It is in evidence that an offer was made by Mr Frick? You had no connection with that?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--What was your connection with it?
A.--I did not---no offer by Mr. Frick.
Q.--It has been stated here there was an offer. Mr. Hyde said there was an offer to Mr. Frick.
A.--That I do not know of. But Mr. Hyde had told me himself that he had received several offers for the purchase of his stock, and I asked him what he was going to do, and he said he would not sell it under any consideration, and I encouraged him in that. And Mr. Frick came to me and told me that he had heard also---then I said to him "I think you ought to tell Mr. Hyde not to sell that stock to anybody, and if he does he should not sell it without letting you know." And I understood from Mr. Frick that that was what he said.
Q.--Then you at no time made any effort to acquire Mr. Hyde's stock?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--And down to the time of the report of the Frick committee you encouraged Mr. Hyde in the retention of his stock?
A.--Yes. sir.
Q.--What did you do as to the report of the Frick committee, if anything, in reference to that?
A.--You have come to the point that the interview of the day before the Frick report was presented, when Mr. Hyde came to my office and I made the same suggestion to him that I had to Mr. Gulliver about his course as to the Frick report, and I told him then that this might be something which he would not feel courage enough to stand up under and it might jeopardize the value of his stock, but that I did not think that anybody but the Equitable ought to own that stock other than himself, and that if he had any fears on that subject that I would subscribe $500,000 to a fund to help him hold it, and if we thought it desirable, to turn it over absolutely to the ownership of the Equitable without any compensation, and that I thought others could be induced to do the same thing.
Q.--In what way was this subscription to aid him in holding the stock?
A.--Well, it was to take an interest with him and hold it for the beneft of the Equitable or present it to the Equitable.
Q.--With the idea that he should continue owner and in that way be able to realize upon his holdings to some extent?
A.--To some extent.
Q.--What did he say to that?
A.--I don't remember that he said anything.
Q.--You were one of the signers of the Frick report?
A.--Yes.
Q.--Did the Frick committee consider the matter of the Union Pacific preferred stock syndicate?
A.--Yes, sir.
Q.--Was it before them that Mr. Hyde had told you that he did not care to make all the payments that would be called for by his individual subscriptlon, but that the Equitable Life Assurance Society would make them?
A.--I had no conversation with Mr. Hyde as to who should pay for the stock other than the original conversation that we had in 1900---when he came home from Europe, I think it was in January, 1902.
Q.--The one you have detailed a few moments ago?
A.--Yes.
Q.--In which he referred to the Equitable Life?
A.--Yes, sir.
Q.--Did you present to the Frick committee or was there presented to the Frick committee that fact?
A.--Not that I remember.

THE UNION PACIFIC SYNDICATE.

Q.--Did the Frick committee apart from yourself know anything of the relation of the Equitable Life to the Union Pacific preferred stock syndicate---that is, of the fact that payment had been made by them and the stock was taken by them, and that Mr Hyde's name was used with the sanction of Mr. Alexander?
A.--I don't think they had any specific information or evidence other than the one that was done at that time, and the statement that had been made by Mr. Alexander.
Q.--You mean the general statement which he had incorporated in some letter he had written, or some statement made to the board?
A.--I don't remember what that was.
Q.--Did the members of the Frick committee inquire of you as to the facts?
A.--I don't remember that they did.
Q.--Did they inquire of Mr. Hyde as to the facts?
A.--I don't remember that they did
Q.--And the matter was not mentioned in the report of the Frick committee?
A.--Well, it was included in the charges that were made by Mr. Alexander.
Q.--I did not catch your idea, Mr. Harriman. In other words, you mean that the general statement or finding by the committee that Mr. Hyde had committed the society to transactions without the knowledge of the executive committee---
A.--Evidently.
Q.--Was deemed by the Frick committee to cover the matter of the Union Pacific preferred stock syndicate without special mention?
A.--Yes.
Q.--Do you know whether or not Governor Odell wrote a letter either to the President or to the Secretary of State advocating the appointment of Mr. Hyde as French Ambassador shortly or immediately after the settlement of the suit against the Mercantile Trust Company?
A.--Now, I am not sure about that, Mr. Hughes. When you speak of it, I believe there was some conversation.
Q.--Was it a part of the arrangement with reference to the settlement of this suit that such a letter should be written by Governor Odell or a recommendation made?
A.--That is so far as I know?
Q.--Yes, of course.
A.--No, sir.
Q.--You never heard anything of that kind?
A.--No, sir.

DID WITHDRAW $2,700,000 LOAN.

Mr. Harriman confirmed Mr. Hyde's testimony that he had withdrawn his $2,700,000 loan from the Equitable when the rate of interest was raised, but insisted that he had paid the market rate at all times and that the regular margin of collateral was maintained. His testimony regarding the "blind pool" was materially different from that of Mr. Hyde. The latter testified that he had been forced to absolute secrecy on this subject by Mr. Harriman. Mr. Harriman's reference to the Frick report mention of the Union Pacific pool has already been shown.

In addition, Mr. Harriman declared that while secrecy was obviously requisite because of the nature of the undertaking, he had never at any time or in any way directed Mr. Hyde not to refer the matter to the Equitable Executive Committee. He corroborated Mr. Hyde's contention, denied by Jacob H. Schiff, that Mr. Hyde's participation was with Equitable funds, but did not say or suggest that Mr. Schiff knew this. Mr. Harriman insisted he placed no restriction on Mr. Hyde in the matter of secrecy about this incident, and testified to his belief in the propriety of the Equitable participation in the Union Pacific syndicate and in syndicates in general.

Regarding his entrance into the Equitable directorate Mr. Harriman testified that he had been asked to come by Mr. Hyde and had demurred, suggesting James J. Hlll. He initially yielded on Mr. Hyde's representation that he desired to "surround himself with independent men" and change the methods then obtaining, of which Mr. Harriman declared he did not approve. Of his duties as a director Mr. Harriman gave an instructive talk, which summarized the impotence and ignorance of directors in general except those on important committees. He denied all knowledge of various "yellow dog" accounts and campaign contributions. His illumination apparently came at the time of the Frick committee.

Regarding his view of Mr. Hyde Mr. Harriman testified he was surrounded---he was a young man with a great deal of power, and power which was apt to increase---and that he was apparently surrounded by people who were catering to his particular desires, without reference to what---without any special reference to what influence it might have on the Equitable's affairs, and that if he was to grow and get experience, he would do better by having around him men who were independent and had had experience in business affairs, who would sustain him and help him.

As Mr. Harriman was leaving the stand Mr. Untermyer made the appeal to be allowed to cross-examine. When this was overruled, he asked several questions through Mr. Hughes. One of these developed the fact that when he had recommended Mr. Hyde to move the adoption of the Frick report he had not told him that in effect this called for his removal. Mr. Harriman insisted, however, that his advice was sound and kindly meant. Mr. Harriman acknowledged that Mr. Hyde did not know its contents. Mr. Harriman further said that he had viewed the appointment of the Frick committee as necessary, but had been asked by Senator Depew to hold back his resolution for this committee.

HYDE STICKS TO STORY. Page 3, Columns 3 & 4,

Refuses to Change It When Contradicted by Harriman.

The long wrangle between Mr. Untermyer and the committee as to his right to cross-examine Mr. Harriman was followed by the recall of Mr. Hyde. Mr. Hyde was asked to repeat or change his testimony conflicting with Mr. Harriman's, but stood to his original testimony. The testimony on this point follows:

Q.--Did you go to Mr. Harriman and request him to bring about, if posslble, a settlement of Mr. Odell's claim?
A.--I don't remember going there with Mr. Deming, as Mr. Harriman testified.
Q.--Did you request Mr. Harriman to bring about a settlement of Governor Odell's claim?
A.--No, as I have already testified, he suggested it.
Q.--Do you desire to add anything to your testimony yesterday?
A.--No, sir. I don't think so.
Q.--Or to change it?
A.--No, sir.
Mr. Hughes---That is all.
Mr. Rogers---Where was this conversation?
A.--In Mr. Harriman's offlce. I don't know whether it was in his front private office or back office.
Q.--You can say whether there at your own motion or at his suggestion?
A.--Yes, sir. I have answered it.
Mr. Hughes---Did you have any interview with Governor Odell at Mr. Harrimau's office?
A.---Yes, sir, once.
Q.--In Mr. Harriman's presence?
A.--He was there and went out.
Q.---Was there anything said at that time about any attack upon the charter of the Mercantile Trust Company?
A.--No. sir.
Q.--Was anything ever said by Governor Odell on that point to you or in your hearing?
A.--No, sir.
Q.--Or about any proceedings against the Mercantile Trust Company other than legal proceedings?
A.--No. sir.
Mr. Hughes---That is all.
Mr. Untermyer---From whom did the statement come as to the attack on the charter?
A.--It came from Mr. Harriman.

Earlier in the day Mr. Hyde testified to the fact that he had received offers for his 502 shares of Equitable from H. C. Frick, from George J. Gould, and finally from Gage E. Tarbel. The last named had offered $1,000,000 as a representative of a syndicate. The size of this offer provoked a general laugh. Frick's offer had been $5,000,000. Mr. Hughes had also traced the famous Ambler Bill, showing that it had been introduced by Assemblyman R. J. Fish in the lower house "by request." The date of this introduction was March 31, 1904. The bill was referred to the judiciary committees of both houses and seems to have died there.

The most startling incident of the morning session was the testimony regarding the purchase, sale and repurchase by the Equitable of stock in the Lawyers' Title Insurance Company. The papers in Mr. Hughes's possession showed that the Equitable had acquired 2,000 shares of this stock at 174 and immediately resold 1,100 to George H. Squire at the same price. The books of Williamson & Squire showed a purchase of shares of this stock for Mr. Hyde at a price ranging from 301 to 315.

Mr. Hyde's memory on this point was entirely defective. He was out of the country at the time and did not know by what authority the purchases were made. This stock presently made its way back to the Equitable at a price just about twice that for which it had previously parted with it. That officers of the Equitable were buying stock from the Equitable in the name of the American Deposit and Loan Company and reselling it to the Equitable at a great advance was a matter Mr. Hyde had never heard of. The purchase in his name also amazed him. He was sure, however, that W. H. McIntyre, who figured in the deal, did not have his power of attorney.

There seemed to be record of a number of such transactions, but Mr. Hyde could throw no light upon them. In this talk Mr. Hyde made a defence of his father's conduct of Equitable affairs. and Mr. Untermyer, his counsel, sharply attacked State Superintendent Hendricks for his references to the elder Hyde in his report. Much comment on the absence of Mr. McIntyre was also voiced by all concerned at this time.

George H. Squire, Jr., of the firm of Willlamson & Squire, then took the stand, and testified to the stock purchases and resales mentioned above. In these Thomas D. Jordan also figured. George W. Jenkins. of the American Loan and Deposit Company, also testified to more purchases of the Lawyers' Title and Insurance Company stock. A check for $18,000 in profits to George H. Squire figured in his testimony, his firm having purchased for Squire. Recalled later, Mr. Hyde stuck to his story that the purchases in his name were unknown to him. T. F. Wllliamson, Mr. Hyde's secretary, was unable to shed any light on the affair. He could not even recall if his name had been used to carry two loans from the American Deposit and Loan
Company.

TO HEAR DEPEW TO-DAY.

H. C. Frick Likely To Be on Stand Next Week.

Senator Chauncey M. Depew will follow Michael Murray on the witness stand before the legislative committee to-day, and ex-Governor Benjamin B. Odell will begin his testimony to-morrow, according to sources close to the committee, although Edward Lauterbach, Mr. Odell's counsel, says that Mr. Odell will testify to-day.

According to the same sources close to the committee, the testimony of Henry Clay Frick will probably open next week's sessions, and Gage E. Tarbell may follow Mr. Frick. Interests closely identified with James Hazen Hyde were responsible for two explanations made to a Tribune reporter last night of Mr. Hyde's testimony as to the $75,000 shipbuilding settlements by the Mercantile Trust Company with Mr. Odell. According to these informants, Governor Odell's suit was settled on December 30, 1904. They said:

In the legislature ended about May, 1904, the insurance people managed to block the Ambler bill.

In the next legislature (that is, the most recent one) Mr Hyde believed that Mr. Odell, though his term would have expired, would enjoy a still stronger influence and following. Accordingly a settlement was made with him on December 30, just two days before his term expired.

Those who followed the course of Albany politics last winter concurred in Mr. Hyde's view that, although Mr. Odell would no longer be Governor in the 1905 session, in December, 1904, with Senator Depew's renomination, it did actually appear that Mr. Odell would have still stronger influence in the 1905 legislature than in the one preceding it. Subsequent happenings, however, point to the falsity of this view, they added.

It is said that the bill referred to was introduced on March 31, 1904, and that his suit was settled on the date already noted.

Mr. Lauterbach said last night that Mr. Odell would clear up everything on the stand before the investigating committee to-day. As to the date of the beginning of the action against the Mercantile, Mr. Lauterbach said:

I am not certain about that, although it was soon after the faiiure of Dresser which, I think, was in August, 1903. The suit had been pending a long time before it was settled. It would have been reached for trial in the course of another month, which, however, was anticipated by the settlement.

The other suits against the Mercantile Trust Company were settled as well and on even better terms than that which Mr. Odell secured.

PART OF NEIDER'S BODY FOUND, The Sun, Feb. 12, 1912

February 12, 1912, The Sun, "PART OF NEIDER'S BODY FOUND,"

Page 4, Column 4,


Head of Watchman Victim of Equitable Fire Is Still Missing.

Parts of a charred body thought to be the remains of Frank Joseph Neider, attendant in the vaults of the Mercantile Safe Deposit Company, who has been missing ever since fire destroyed the Equitable Building, were found yesterday afternoon by workmen of the Thompson-Starrett Company. About twenty feet inside of the third window from Broadway on the Cedar street side of the building the men came across the heel of a rubber boot in which were parts of bone and flesh. Other discoveries were of bits of bones and a larger piece of charred bone and flesh which looks like part of a man's trunk and thigh. The head was not found. Coroner Winterbottom has ordered the parts collected and taken to the Old Slip police station to be held.

The charred remains were found lying on the floor inside of a cage at the bottom of a flight of stairs leading down into the vaults at the corner of the building on Cedar street and Broadway. Search was at once begun for the head. About ten pieces were found. It was feared that some parts might have been loaded on to wagons and orders were given by telephone to examine all wagons arriving at the dumps. Neider was 45 years old and lived at 717 Melrose avenue, The Bronx, wi th his wife and a daughter. The search was continued last night and it was feared from the charred condition of the debris that nothing more, not even the head, would be found.

The Ogden City, Utah, Evening Standard, EQUITABLE LIFE BUILDING IN NEW YORK DESTROYED,

January 9, 1912, The [Ogden City, Utah] Evening Standard, "EQUITABLE LIFE BUILDING IN NEW YORK DESTROYED,"
Page 1, Columns 1, 2 & 3,

BUSINESS IN THE FINANCIAL CENTER SUSPENDED FOR HOURS WHILE THE FIREMEN STRUGGLE TO KEEP THE FLAMES FROM SPREADING TO ADJOINING SKYSCRAPERS

DEPUTY FIRE CHIEF WALSH CREMATED

Three Watchmen, Trapped by the Flames, Jump From the High Structure---Wm. Giblin, Head of the Mercantile Safe Deposit Company, Caught in the Vaults, But Released by Battering Down a Steel Door---Loss Estimated at 15,000,00

New York, Jan. 9. The great marble nine-story building of the Equitable Life Assurance society, at 120 Broadway, the home of the Mercantile Trust company, the Equitable Trust company, the banking house of Kountze Brothers, the Mercantile Safe Deposit company and the Harriman lines, was destroyed early today by fire. Three men lost their lives by leaping from the roof and the property loss is estimated at about $6,000,000.

Millions of dollars in cash and securities are locked in the vaults of the Assurance society and the banking and trust companies, but are not believed to be affected by the flames.

William Giblin, president of the Mercantile Safe Deposit company, was imprisoned with three other employes in the vaults and was rescued after the firemen had sawed through several two-inch steel bars. One man is believed to have lost his life in the vaults.

Deputy Fire Chief Walsh is supposed to have been burned to death, after being imprisoned in the burning structure.

The fire was in the heart of the financial district and the flames were fought mainly from the tops of sky-scrapers. Business was brought almost to a complete standstill among banking and brokerage houses, whose employes could not reach the scene of their daily activities. Financial firms stopped business to care for the firemen.

Most of the vital records of the Equitable Life Assurance society were kept in the branch offices of the society in the Hazen building, several blocks from the main offices.

WHILE THE FIRE WAS BURNING.

New York, Jan. 9. The immense granite office building of the Equitable Life Assurance society on lower Broadway was destroyed today by a fire which is still burning. Four bodies already have been taken out of the building and there is little doubt that several more dead and alive are caught in the ruins.

The big Equitable building was also the home of the Union and Southern Pacific railways, the banking house of August Belmont & Co., the Mercantile Trust company, now a subsidiary of the Bankers' Trust company, the Mercantile Safe Deposit company, together with a number of New York financial firms.

Millions on millions of dollars in securities and cash were cared for in the immense vaults of the Equitable company and in the vaults of the trust and safe deposit companies, but it is not believed that the heat of the fire can penetrate the safes and that there will be no loss from this source.

The heaviest loss, besides that of the building, was caused by the destruction of insurance and railroad records.

Within two hours after the fire broke out at 5:30 o'clock, the bullding was a mass of flames and the firemen, working from the tops of skyscrapers and from the streets below were trying to prevent the flames spreading to the buildings on the opposite sides of the streets.

The Equitable building occupies the block between Broadway and Nassau streets and Pine and Cedar streets The fire was first dlscovered on the ground floor in a store room of the Cafe Savarin, and, carried by a draught of air, shot upward through an elevator shaft, setting fire to the upper floors. A general alarm was turned in, and when the fire department reached the scene the flames were bursting out of the windows in the southeast corner of the building.

A gale, sweeping through the streets, drove the flames through the building from end to end. Firemen dragged their hose to the tops of the Chase National bank on Pine street and the Fourth National bank on Nassau street, while other lines of hose were run up on a skyscraper opposite the building on Broadway from which streams of water were directed on the flames. Five alarms were turned in and fire tugs from the North and East rivers grouped themselves at a convenient dock and pumped volumes of water into the building.

Three watchmen in the building heroically remained to fight the flames with fire extinguishers, but they were finally driven to the roof. Firemen made a heroic attempt to save them and scaling ladders were run up.

Rescuers got as high as the fourth foors when the watchmen, their forms outlined against the glare of the flames, were seen to kneel and pray and then, as the corner of the building on which they were standing fell, they jumped to the street. The firemen on the scaling ladders had difficulty in making their way back to the streets.

Fire Commissioner Johnson discovered William Giblin, president of the Mercantile Safe Deposit company, at the corner of Cedar street and Broadway, imprisoned in the vaults. He could be seen from the streets and his legs were pinned down by a mass of fixtures and debris which had fallen from above. He was alive and held out his hand to the firemen, who made frantic, though futile, attempts to break through the heavy steel doors. Father McGean of the fire department administered the last rites to the man.

Commissioner Johnson said he thought the imprisoned man was the president of the Mercantile Safe Deposit company, who had arrived at the building after the fire was under way and had attempted to save some papers.

Two Men Imprisoned.

Deputy Fire Chief William Walsh and four firemen were caught under a section of the floor when the upper floor gave way. Firemen managed to reach a window ledge from which they were rescued by means of a life line, but when they looked back Chief Walsh had disappeared in the smoking ruins. Efforts were made to reach the spot where he was buried but the firemen could not find him.

Father McGean nearly lost his life when administering the last rites to Giblin, the firemen dragging him away just as a shower of bricks and stones fell on the spot where he had been kneeling.

As a fireman carried Father McGean away Giblin turned to him and pityingly said:

"For God's sake. Father, take me out of here! I am dying. Can't you get at me?"

Porters Rescued.

Two porters in the safe deposit ompany were rescued from the basement of the building when the sidewalk in front of the structure caved in. They were injured and removed to a hospital.

The fire was finally confined to the Equitable building, though for a time it seemed as if the flames would sweep across the street and set fire to the American Exchange National bank, at Cedar street and Broadway, on which the sparks were falling in a shower. This building was kept wet down by streams of water from the skyscrapers on all sides.

The flames had the intensity of a blast furnace. The heavy floors of the building buckled under the white heat of the fire and fell in, while the walls crumbled and dropped into the streets.

Parts of the Brooklvn fire department were sent to aid in preventing the spread of flames. Business in the financial section was brought practically to a standstill. Thousands of clerks in banking and brokerage houses, railroad and industrial corporations were held back by police lines formed two blocks north of the fire and traffic of every kind in the streets nearby the burning building was forbidden by the police.

Three Men In Vaults.

After the flames had been checked three men were reported to be alive in the vaults of the Mercantile Safe Deposit company, where one man had already lost his life, and the firemen tried to batter down the steel doors. The falling stone and brick had blocked and warped the doors so that they could not be unlocked.

While the firemen were hammering away, a part of the coping fell and the rescuers had a narrow escape. After the stone had fallen the firemen made renewed efforts to penetrate the doors. Firemon at last succeeded in battering in a steel door and rescuing two watchmen who were imprisoned in the vault. They also rescued William Giblin.

Ambulances from four hospitals were on the scene and took care of the injured.

Assessed at $12,000,000.

With the exception of one insurance building, the Equitable Life Assurance society had a greater assessed valuation than any other building in the financial district, the figures being $12,000,000.

Tho other occupants of the Equitable building, besides the Harriman railway, were the executive offices of the Western Maryland railroad, together with the offices of Herbert Satterlee, son-in-law of J. P. Morgan, and Alexander & Green.

After President Giblin was rescued he was carried to the boiler room of the Trinity building. Surgeons stripped him of his clothing and wrapped him in heavy blankets. Stimulants were administered. After a brief rest Mr. Giblin said:

How Giblin Was Caught.

"I was sitting up last night with my wife, who has been very ill, when an employe of the hotel informed me that the Equitable building was on fire. When I arrived at the building there were no flames but plenty of smoke. I hurried into one of the vaults to get some valuable papers, followed by one of the night watchmen. The vault had a spring lock and I left my keys outside.

"When the man and I started to leave the door swung shut and we were both prisoners. The smoke was awful. We shouted, but it seemed we were doomed. The other man was alive up to half an hour ago, but just before I was carried out he fainted and I think he must be dead."

Mr. Giblin was taken to the Hudson street hospital. He was very weak, but in no immediate danger. The offices of the Harriman lines, which were in the building, were being moved to 165 Broadway. Everything had been moved save the papers in the legal department. Many valuable records, including the autobiography of E. H. Harriman, was there, and it was believed that these and other valuable records were destroyed.

Three employes of the building leaped from the third floor to the street. They were taken to the hospital seriously injured.

After the fire had been checked and the firemen were able to get closer to the building it was discovered that the Belmont building, on Nassau street, which adjoins the burning building, had been saved, though the offices of August Belmont & Co. had been flooded with water.

Railroad Loss Not Heavy.

President Lovett of the Harriman lines said that, as all of the Union and Southern Pacific securities held in the treasury were kept outside the city, the monetary loss to the railroads would be small. Mr Lovett said that the extent of inconvenience suffered because of the loss of records will, of course, depend on whether the vault's on the third and fourth floors have been destroyed. The records referred to include those of the comptroller's department, the treasurer's office and the transfer department.

President Day of the Equitable called a meeting of the executive committee at the company's new building in Greenwich street to consider the matter of securing temporary quarters. Of the 1,300 clerks employed by the society, about 600 were in the main building, while the others were engaged at work in the Greenwich street building. The offices of the Equitable Trust company luckily escaped the flames, but were damaged by water, as were the offices of August Belmont.

Four Known to Be Dead.

Four men are known to be dead and five injured in the fire and several persons are missing, including Battalion Chief Walsh.

The fire was still burning in the debris in the basement of the building this afternoon.

Conservative estimates of the damage placed the loss in the neighborhood of $10,000,000, while others say that the loss will run as high as $15,000,000.

According to an officer of the Equitable, the great safety deposit vaults in the building contained last night securities aggregating between $250,000,000 and $300,000,000. The vaults are belived to be intact.

President Day of the Equitable said this afternoon:

"The burning of the home office at 120 Broadway will cause but temporary inconvenience. Securities and important records are protected by fireproof vaults which are intact. Most of the office force and records were removed some time ago to the society's building, No. 2 Albany street.

"The executive offices of the society and the cashier's department have been established in the City Investing building. This will, for the time being, be the home office of the society."

Gage E. Tarbell. a former vice president of the Equitable, said that the society carried its own insurance. Many of the large banks announced today that, owing to the fire, they would not exercise their prerogative of calling loans today. The money market, owing to the action of the Stock Exchange, was practically at a standstill.

FIRE UPSET BUSINESS IN FINANCIAL DISTRICT.

New York, Jan. 8 Banking and brokerage business was halted for a time by the fire and the governors of the stock exchange met to determine what action should be taken with respect to deliveries of securities purchased yesterday. The decision was reached that transfers may be suspended for a day by mutual consent.

The clearing house in the Chase National bank was closed and temporary quarters were opened at the Chamber of Commerce. Depositors and bank customers of the burned out trust companies as well as those of financial institutions located in the neighborhood of the burned building were unable to reach their banks, being held back by the police lines.

An officer of the Equitable Life Assurance society said that the society had duplicates of every record, which were stored in a building several blocks away from the burned structure. The fire, he said, would not affect the company's business with its policyholders throughout the country.

Officials of the Mercantile Safe Deposit company said the vaults were intact and not a cent would be lost.