Edward H. Miller Jr. Deposition

Q. 163 Have you in your possession a letter from defendant dated sometime between March and July, 1872, excepting to those two charges — Barge "Dick" and Barge "Yolo" — because those vessels did not belong to him and that transportation was not done by him?

A. I do not know that I have any such letter; but I am under the impression that some such transaction occurred. I recollect something of it.

Q. 164 When you made these charges against the defendant and collected from him the amounts did you understand that the business was being done for the benefit of the defendant, and not for the benefit — of the company, so far as the transporta= =tion was concerned?

A. That the defendant was doing the transportation on his own account?

Q. 165 Yes: for his own profit.

A. Yes. I understood that he was doing the transportation on his own account.

Q. 166 Do you recollect the time that the schooners "Elko" and "Truckee" were sold by your companies to the defendant?

A. I cannot fix the date.

Q. 167 Look at the document now given

30

you, which is a bill of sale of the schooner "Elko," made by the Central Pacific Rail= =road Company to the defendant, dated the 22d day of March, 1873, and which is the same bill of sale made Exhibit "A" to the deposition of Leland Stanford in this case: Is that signed by you?

A. Yes.

Q.168 Was that made, as the attesting clause imports, by the direction of the board of directors of your company?

A. It was.

Mr. Robinson: Not the fact that this bill of sale is made by the Central Pacific Railroad Company, successor by consolidat= =tion under the laws of the state of Cal= =ifornia to the Western Pacific Railroad Company.

Q. 169 Mr. Cohen: I believe that, at the same time you executed this, you executed a similar instrument, transferring the schooner "Truckee," did you not?

Obj'n Mr. Robinson: We object to any testimony regarding the contents of any written in= =strument without its being produced or its absence accounted for.

A. I presume so, but I do not recollect the fact. I know they were both sold.

Q. 170 Mr. Cohen: I believe you received

31

the money for them, did you not?

A. I think not.

Q. 171 Did not the defendant, on or about the first day of January, 1873, remit you a check on the Bank of California for the payment of these vessels?

A. I do not recollect it. I think they were paid for.

Q. 172 Do you know the fact that these vessels were paid for?

A. I think they were.

Q. 173 [Letter shown witness.] Do you recollect receiving a letter of which that is a copy?

A. I do not recollect it.

Exhibit "E." [The copy of letter above referred to is place in evidence, marked Exhibit "E." Letter dated San Francisco, February 2, 1871.]

Q. 174 [A letter shown to witness, dated July 12, 1872, purporting to be a copy of a letter written by the defendant to the witness; and also a letter signed "E. H. Miller, Jr., Secretary," addressed to the defendant, Exhibit "F" dated July 13, 1872. Put in evidence and marked, respectively Exhibit "F, 1," and Exhibit "F, 2."] Look at those two documents and state whether you remem= =ber every having received such a letter as that ["F, 1"] from the defendant, and

32

returned this ["F, 2"] in answer thereto.

A. I believe I received a letter of which that ["F, 1"] is a copy. This ["F, 2"] was the answer in reply to it. It was not written by me.

Q. 175 Was it written by your authority?

A. Yes: by my brother, the assistant secretary of the company.

Q. 176 During the time that the defend= =ant used those schooners in the transport= =ation of coal for your company, after their purchase by him, were they used for the profit or loss of the corporation or of the defendant?

A. Not for the corporation's.

Q. 177 Do you know anything of your own knowledge about the arrangement that was made by the defendant with the plaintiff, or with the parties who sup= =plied the coal, as to the transportation?

A. I do not.

Q. 178 I understand you to say that you do not know anything in relation to the nature of the defendant's employment by the plaintiff.

A. I do not think I said that.

Q. 179 I will ask you, then, if you know the nature of the contract, if any there

33

was, made between the plaintiff and defendant for the rendering of services by the defendant to the plaintiff, or to the Western Pacific Railroad Company?

A. I do not know anything of the contract. I did know something about the nature of the employment: I did know something about what defendant did for the com= =pany, but did not know under what contract it was done. That is the dis= =tinction which I draw.

Cross-Examination by Mr. McAllister

Q. 180 When did the Central Pacific Railroad Company move their offices from Sacramento to San Francisco?

A. In October, 1873.

Q. 181 Previous to that time had you re= =sided in Sacramento?

A. Yes sir.

Q. 182 Had your duties as secretary of this corporation kept you resident there?

A. Yes sir.

Q. 183 Was your office as secretary there?

A. Yes sir.

Q. 184 When the company moved their offices

34