David Stewart vs. C.P. Huntington

[top left margin:] 26

Ques 2. But he always signed his name as attorney in fact for C. P. Huntington's business?

Ans. — Always, both before and after that date.

Ques. 3 — Was that the case at the time that these blanks in that certificate were filled in, and in which you stated the writing was the handwriting of Mark Hopkins?

Ans. It was.

Ques. 4 — Do you know under what terms or conditions the stock of the Contract and Finance Co. was assigned to Stanford, C. P. Huntington, Crocker, and Mark Hopkins?

Ans. I do not.

Ques. 5 — Was it in the form of a dividend?

Ans. I do know.

[centered] San Francisco, Cal. Sept. 20. 1880. Eleven o'clock A.M. [centered]

The Witness desires to explain his testimony with respect to the answers to questions 70 and 71 as follows:

"The certificates of stock that "stood are the books of the Central "Pacific Railroad Company of Cali"fornia in the name of the Contract and Finance Company at "the line of the Consolidation with "the Western Pacific Railroad Com"pany in June 1870, were surrender"ed by the Contract and Finance "Company and new certificates "were issued by the Consolidated Com"pany, to wit: the Central Paci"fic Railroad Company therefor[therefore] to "the Contract and Finance Com"pany in accordance with the terms "of the articles of Consolidation."

[heading centered] Redirect Examination

By Mr. Cohen. Q. Have you the

"to receive and hold one "equal amount and number "of shares of the capital stock "of the said new and Con"solidated Company and Corpora"tion, now held by them res"pectively and shall be entitled "to receive from the new and "Consolidated Company and "Corporation, certificates therefor[therefore] "upon the surrender of the certi"ficates of stock issued by "said several parties of the "first and second parts, or if "their right to stock is other"wise evidenced there by sur"render of such evidence that "they are entitled to certificates "from either of said parties".

In the Supreme Court of the State of New York in and for the city and County of New York. [underlined with double horizontal red lines]

David Stewart vs. C. P. Huntington et als. [underlined with double horizontal red lines]

Lloyd Aspinwall et al Exrs. vs. The Same. [underlined with double horizontal red lines]

William Paton vs. The Same. [underlined with double horizontal red lines]

Elizabeth S. Paton, Executrix, &c. vs. The Same [underlined with double horizontal red lines]

John T. Agnew et al, surviving partners, &c. vs. The Same. [underlined with double horizontal red lines]

DEPOSITION [double horizontal red underline]

of witnesses produced, sworn and examined the ninth and Eleventh days of December, in the year One Thousand, Eight-hundred and Eighty at San Francisco, California, under and by virtue of a Commission issued out of the [inserted]Supreme Court of the State of New York, in and for the City and County of New York in five certain cases therein depending and at issue in one of which David Stewart is plaintiff in another of which Lloyd Aspinwall et al

Executors, are plaintiffs; in another of which William Paton is plaintiff; in another of which Elizabeth S. Paton, as Executrix, &c. is plaintiff; in another of which John T. Agnew et al., surviving partners, &c, are plaintiffs, and in all of which C. P. Huntington and others are defendants, as follows:

G. Frank Smith, [horizontal red double underline] aged fifty five years and upwards, being duly and publicly sworn, pursuant to the directions hereto annexed, and examined on the part of the plaintiffs, doth depose and say, as follows;

(Before Wm Thomas, Commissioner.) [horizontal red double underline]

(For Plaintiffs, A. A. Cohen.) [horizontal red double underline]

(For Defendants, S. W. Sanderson) [horizontal red double underline]

[bottom left margin:] Page 2