Stanford - County of San Joaquin vs. Central Pacific R.R.

line 49 of page 10 you say "In answer to so much of "said complaint as is contained "in subdivision 26 thereof the "said defendants further jointly "and severally deny that the "alleged dividends, profits and gains "therein alleged to have been received "or realized by the said defendants "Stanford, Huntington, Hopkins, "Charles and E. B. Crocker or "their confederates in the name "of Charles Crocker and Company "or in the name of said Contract "and Finance Company amount "to the sum of $211,299,308.17 or any "other sum nearly so large." Will you state what the amount received actually was and how it was received, that is what description of property whether money, bonds, stocks or otherwise.

Mr. Sanderson. We make the same objection and give the same advice.

A. "On"[crossed out] I decline to answer under advice of counsel.

Here an adjournment was taken until Monday, December, 20th at 10 A.M.

[bottom left margin:] 16

In the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco

The County of San Joaquin — vs — The Central Pacific Railroad Company et al.

San Francisco December 20th 1880.

Be it remembered that on this 20th day of December A. D. 1880 before me E. V. Joice Notary Public in and for the City and County of San Francisco duly commissioned and sworn, appeared A. A. Cohen Esq. Attorney for the plaintiff and S. W. Sanderson Esq. Attorney for the defendants and also came pursuant to previous adjournments Leland Stanford and Edward H. Miller Jr. witnesses hereto fore partially examined on behalf of the plaintiff, whereupon by consent an adjournment was taken until December 27th 1880. at 10 A.M.

[bottom left margin:] 17