New-Yorker Staats-Zeitung, June 27, 1889, p.4

Well adjudicated. – William Steinway wins the case against the 'Standard Gaslight Co." - A 'late' protocol logbook.

The Standard Gaslight Co. case against William Steinway, mentioned several times in this paper, was decided in favor of Mr. Steinway yesterday in the Court of Common Pleas in front of Judge Daly because the plaintiff could not sustain the case. The plaintiff had insisted that in 1884 the corporation, consisting of Nagius Gross, Ward N. Parker and Wm R. De Kraft, was insolvent and that the accused had offered to buy the company assets for a nominal sum, to re-organize the same and then transfer the assets back to the re-organized corporation. The plaintiff argued that although Mr. Steinway had purchased the assets he did not transfer them back to the Standard Gaslight Co. but to the East River Gas Co. of which he had become a member in the meantime. Mr. Steinway’s attorney George W. Cotterill stated that Standard Gas had operated at a loss and was unable to pay in 1884. The corporation had owed Mr. Steinway money and his Trustees had asked him to purchase the assets. Mr. Steinway did this and paid more than the market value for it without thinking at the time of transferring it to East River Gas. He did this later in good faith and with the knowledge of the Standard Gas Trustees, who actually had admitted to this but did not file a court case until 4 years later.

Although the trial lasted a full week, the evidence phase centered mainly around the point of whether or not Mr. Steinway had entered into an agreement with Standard Gas Light. In their attempt to justify their argument the plaintiffs were forced to present their protocol log from 1884, which had been kept by the company Secretary W. J. Coolenkamp. When this had barely taken place Mr. Cotterill produced evidence that the logbook had recently been purchased and that the entries had also been made recently, i.e. since January 1 of this year, while the case had been started over a year ago. When Mr. Cotterill cross-examined Mr. Coolenkamp he [Coolenkamp] stated that he had written the entries just 6 weeks ago and had destroyed his original notes.

The accused further stated that a large portion of the Standard Gas assets had been fraudulently sold to ‘Excelsior Gas Co.’ and that Magnus Groß and also Wm. R. De Kraft had been Trustees of both companies at the time. The accused further presented evidence that Major O’Rourke had sought a case to revoke the asset transfer on the grounds that the trustees had no right to authorize such a transfer. And the accused proved that Trustee Packen had no knowledge of the arrangement. Wm. R. De Kraft had not appeared for the proceedings although he had also signed the complaint. Magnus Groß testified almost exclusively aided by Secretary Coolenkamp. Mr. Steinway testified that in the whole transaction he acted in good faith and so honorably that Mr. Groß thus had the advantage.

The accused, beaten in its case, now insisted that at the time of purchase Mr. Steinway had promised the employees of Standard Gas payment of the outstanding wages. They wanted to show that Mr. Steinway, despite the agreement with Standard Gas, had reneged on it and that such an agreement had existed. During the questioning of various previous employees under oath, they stated that although Mr. Steinway had given them a generous present in their desperate situation, he had not promised to pay them their overdue wages.

The reason for De Kraft’s absence was that he had written several letters to Major O’Rourke, who had initiated the case against Excelsior Gas. In them he had stated that the transaction between the trustees of Standard Gaslight and the Excelsior Gas Co. had been a fraudulent action. Under these conditions the jurors could not in view of the protocol logbook do anything else but proclaim a unanimous verdict in favor of Mr. Steinway. W. Tazewell Fox had represented the plaintiff.

[hhv]