fall in all securities, government as well as private. In order to make a favorable showing in certain annual reports, securities were trans ferred from one company to another and shares were undoubtedly overvalued. This occurred in the annual reports to share holders in 1899 and 1900. In order to avert the crash Mr. Wright used his own private means for the benefit of the companies to the extent, it is alleged, of several millions of dollars. It was, however, an unavailing offer and liquidation in tin- bankruptcy courts, so far as the companies were con cerned, resulted. Bad blood, however, had been engendered, and an effort was made to induce the government to institute a prosecution against Whitaker Wright for the statutory offence of making a false and fraudulent balance sheet with intent to de ceive. After consideration by the law of ficers of the crown the Attorney General an nounced in Parliament that he did not see his way clear to undertake л prosecution. The matter rested here until nearly a year later, when an application was made to the Chancery Court for leave for the liquidator of one of the companies to use its funds for the expenses of the prosecution. This ap plication was acceded to, and the funds in the hands of the liquidator were supple mented by private subscription. The day this order was made Whitaker Wright de parted from England, and shortly after wards left France, under an assumed nam», for New York where he was arrested upon arrival. His American counsel finding it impossible to obtain an order admitting- him to bail, waived further proceedings and in custody of the officers who had been sent over to bring him back, he voluntarily re turned to England. Here he was admitted to bail, and at once began preparation for his trial. The preliminary examination be
fore the magistrate occupied some weeks, and in all five months elapsed between his arrival in this country and his trial. Naturally every attempt was made to se cure delay and to obtain the acquittal of the prisoner. He had means for his defence, and employed the best available counsel. It is no reflection upon procedure in America to say that under similar circumstances it is extremely likely that the trial itself, involv ing, as it did, hundreds of volumes of ac counts, so heavy in avoirdupois that they had to be brought into court on wheels, and so intricate in the nature of the transactions they contained, that they required the ser vices of many accountants for weeks to make them comprehensible, would have re quired months for its preparation and con duct and that upon the excuse a protracted delay in bringing it on would have occurred. Then, too, the influences surrounding a suc cessful financier, upon the boards of whose companies were directors eminent in states manship and society and city life, would have counted for something in any other country in the world. Here the trial had no variation from the ordinary course of proce dure, except that it was transferred from the Old Bailey to the High Court. There were no applications for adjournment, no challenges to the jurors and no exceptions to the evidence or the rulings of the judge. The jury was asked the general question if any of the members were connected with the companies managed by the accused, and this being answered in the negative the trial pro ceeded. Altogether it occupied two weeks and two davs, one day being devoted to the address by the counsel for the prosecution, and one day to the address by prisoner's counsel and one day to the summing up by the judge. The jury found a verdict of guilty and the judge imposed the maximum penalty—seven years hard labor. Within less than an hour of the sentence the prison
