The Archive · 1925

No Stock and No Business

Washington H. Koo, export department, and George' E. Ramsay, manager since August 6, gave corroborative evidence as to the firm doing practically no business. The witness Ramsay told the Court that. he was supposed to be manager. He took over from Lopes. Wi had previously been connected with the company, The business mounted to a few orders in transit, He did not know whether the $5,000 deposited was used by Lopes or where it was.

Re-examined by Mr. Schuhl, witness said he believed the office furniture had been paid for.

Mr. Schuhil—Have the company: books?—(Witness, smiling)—Yes, but if T were an accountant I would not call them books.

They had had an order for $250 worth of cigarettes from Wuhu, o2 which they made $10 or $12.

Vacuum Cleaners and Typewriters)

D. J. Santos, examined by Mr. Schuh, with regard to the deposit said he understood that it was to be used for the import and export business and that it could be refunded. The office rent, witness thought, was Tls. 360. No profit was made during the two months he was a partner. When he signed his partnership agreement there was a quantity of goods on hand—vacuum cleaners (Laughter), typewriters and sundries, Mr. Schubl—Vou made good use of the vacuum' cleaners?® Tu your partnership agreement, you Say you have stockton hand valued a Hie 10,007 iitieneThose were samper of when I was Asia Trading Ca, already there

thee The Fiem's This fern a5 a matter of fact ted?—Practically none.

money when you were admit-

Lopes tad no money?—No.

And you had no money?—No.

And you expected to. get your capital from the compradore's be.

Mr. Davies moved for an acquit-ton the ground, that. the fest.

Wie. count in the indictment was framed under the Code of the District of Columbia which was the latest one to be applied in the Court, The code contained a statute which specifically Gvered embezzlement. He submitted that the Government had failed to make out the charge as defined by the Code. It waa cused at all times had been one of the partners. He was certainly not an "agent, attorney, clerk, the servant" of any private person oF ce-partnership.

The motion was overruled and the trial adjourned.

Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.

Your account