Mr. WILKIN. Well, she told me that while I was gone the deputy sheriff came down and took Strassler out of the Trust Co. and back to Flint to appear before the investigation. Senator COUZENS. Do you mean the grand jury investigation? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir. Senator COUZENS. Was that a grand jury investigation or some other kind of investigation? Mr. WILKIN. I don't know. Mr. PECORA. You are not referring to the 1-man grand jury investigation held in Detroit, are you? Mr. WILKIN. No, sir. Mr. PECORA. You are referring to a grand jury investigation held over in Flint? Mr. WILKIN. Yes. Senator COUZENS. Do you mean to say to me that you don't know whether that grand jury proceeding was open or closed? Mr. WILKIN. I don't know; no, sir. Mr. PECORA. Go ahead and complete your statement of what your secretary told you about the matter. Mr. WILKIN. Well, she wanted to see, or she asked this boy to look at, the files over in the bank, to see if there was anything there concerning this matter. And he apparently got this out of the files and gave it to her. That is all I know about it. Senator COUZENS. That isn't the original, is it? Mr. WILKIN. No, sir; that is a copy. Mr. PECORA. I am going to offer in evidence the document produced by the witness, which is a copy of what this office boy gave your secretary; is that it? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir. Mr. PECORA. Mr. Chairman, I offer it. The CHAIRMAN. Let it be admitted, and made a part of the record. (The memorandum dated Jan. 3, 1932, was marked "Committee Exhibit No. 102, Jan. 19, 1934, and will be found immediately following where read by Mr. Pecora.) Mr. PECORA. The memorandum, which is typewritten and unsigned, reads as follows: W.P.J. JANUARY 3, 1932. Mr. H. R. Wilkin telephoned today regarding a deposit of $600,000 which we were supposed to make with him over the year-end in the form of a certificate of deposit. I discussed the matter with Mr. B. K. Patterson of the Guardian Detroit Union Group, Inc., and it seems that due to the confusion incidental to the consolidating of the Guardian Detroit Bank and the National Bank of Commerce, the instructions which he forwarded to us were mislaid. Due, however, to the fact that it was to be a transaction of a few days' duration it was decided that, rather than going to the trouble of making out a certificate of deposit and adjusting the entries on our books, the transaction would be better concluded by the Union Industrial Trust & Savings Bank of Flint making the necessary entries on their books. Now, Mr. Wilkin, does this memorandum, which you say was prepared by Mr. Jacobs, and whose initials are "W. P. J." confirm, according to your recollection of the telephone conversation alluded to therein, and to which you were a participant? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir. Mr. PECORA. What did you understand was meant by this reference to this committee exhibit no. 102: Due, however, to the fact that it was to be a transaction of a few days' duration. Mr. WILKIN. That is not my language. Mr. PECORA. I know that. But what do you understand it refers to? Mr. WILKIN. Apparently that it was just short-time money that I had. Mr. PECORA. That referred to the $600,000 certificate of deposit, a copy of which has heretofore been received in evidence and marked "Committee Exhibit No. 48 ", December 21, 1933, which exhibit you have already seen. Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir. Mr. PECORA. Why was that to be a transaction of a few days' duration? Mr. WILKIN. I could not explain that. Mr. PECORA. You know nothing about it? Mr. WILKIN. No, sir. I knew that we were to get the deposit. It came unsolicited. Mr. PECORA. How did you know you were to get the deposit? Mr. WILKIN. Because we were called on the phone, like was the usual custom. Mr. PECORA. What were you to do with the deposit? Mr. WILKIN. We were to do just what we would do with any deposit. We reduced our bills payable by that amount. Mr. PECORA. By the amount of $600,000? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir. Mr. PECORA. Was a statement of condition of the Union Industrial Bank of Flint made as of December 31, 1931? Mr. WILKIN. It would have to be; yes, sir. Mr. PECORA. Was it in that statement that the bills payable item was reduced by $600,000 as a result of this transaction? Mr. WILKIN. I would think it would be; yes. Mr. PECORA. Do you recall who signed that statement of condition or report? Mr. WILKIN. I do not, but I think I signed most of the statements of condition. That is a routine matter. Mr. PECORA. Do you recall having signed that particular one? Mr. PECORA. You recall, however, the statement, do you not, that the item of "Bills payable was reduced by $600,000 as the result of this process? ་་ Mr. WILKIN. No; I may recall it by seeing the—— Mr. PECORA. The exhibit? Mr. WILKIN. Yes. Mr. PECORA. Having your recollection so refreshed, do you now recall the whole transaction? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir-no, sir; I don't recall the whole transaction. I know that these are our vouchers back of that. They are genuine. Mr. PECORA. I am going to show you again the exhibits that have been received in evidence here as committee exhibits 98, 99, 100, and 101, respectively, as of this date. Two of them appear to be debit slips and two of them appear to be credit slips. Will you look at them and tell this committee for the record just what the effect and meaning and significance was of these four exhibits? Mr. WILKIN. The first that I see is a charge ticket, charging the Guardian Detroit Bank with $600,000. The second is a charge ticket to bills payable, charging $600,000. The next is a credit ticket, crediting the demand certificates of deposit with $600,000. This [indicating] is a credit ticket, crediting the Guardian Detroit Bank with $600,000. Mr. PECORA. I show you what purports to be a photostatic reproduction of the report of condition of the Union Industrial Trust & Savings Bank of Flint as of December 31, 1931, and it bears upon its face a signature reading "H. R. Wilkin." Will you look at it and tell me if you recognize the handwriting of that signature as being your handwriting? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir; that is mine. Mr. PECORA. Look at it more closely and tell us if you recognize the entire document as being a true and correct copy of the report of condition of that bank as of December 31, 1931, signed by you. Mr. WILKIN. I would say it was; yes, sir. Mr. PECORA. Does that refresh your recollection that you signed this particular report? Mr. WILKIN. No, sir; I signed hundreds of reports. Mr. PECORA. Looking at that document which you have just identified as a true and correct copy of the report and which contains the signature of H. R. Wilkin, which you say is in your handwriting, does that not serve to refresh your recollection as to the fact that you signed the original of that particular report? Mr. WILKIN. I signed this report; yes, sir. Mr. PECORA. I offer that copy of it in evidence. (Photostatic copy of report of condition of Union Industrial Savings & Trust Co., Flint, Mich., of Dec. 31, 1931, was marked for identification, "Committee Exhibit No. 103, Jan. 19, 1934.") Senator COUZENS. What is the name of the secretary that appeared before the grand jury? Mr. WILKIN. It was Strassler that appeared before the grand jury. Senator COUZENS. And that is the man whom you have just mentioned who told you the questions he had been asked by the grand jury? Mr. WILKIN. He told her. He has told me since, but he told her at that time. Senator COUZENS. So he did tell you at some time the questions he had been asked by the grand jury? Mr. WILKIN. Yes. Senator COUZENS. Did he tell you his answers? Mr. WILKIN. I don't remember that he did. Mr. PECORA. He would not tell you the questions without telling you the answers, would he? Mr. WILKIN. Just a moment. When the deputy sheriff came and took him out there Strassler was very familiar with Flint. Judge Black, who was conducting this grand jury, was one of the directors of the bank in which I worked. When he got to Flint they did not take him before the judge at all, but they questioned him. He was questioned by the deputy sheriff and the prosecutor in the sheriff's office. Senator COUZENS. Then he did not appear before the grand jury? Mr. WILKIN. No, sir. Senator COUZENS. You testified a while ago that he did. Mr. WILKIN. To all intents he was taken there for that purpose, but he didn't get before the grand jury. Mr. PECORA. I notice in this exhibit no. 103 of this date, which is a photostatic copy of the report of condition of the Flint bank as of December 31, 1931, that the amount of bills payable shown in this report as of that date is $1,500,000. Did you see that? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Do you remember what those bills payable were, the principal items? Mr. WILKIN. It would be notes to other banks, Senator. Mr. PECORA. What other banks? Mr. WILKIN. Some to the Federal Reserve, some to the Guardian, and some, perhaps, in New York. Mr. PECORA. I show you photostatic copies of two certain documents or statements on printed forms with typewritten figures thereon, both captioned "Union Industrial Trust & Savings Bank, Flint, Mich., General Journal Ledger and Statement of Condition." Will you look at them and tell me if you recognize them as being true and correct copies of the ledger sheets referred to? Mr. WILKIN. I would say they are copies of those sheets; yes. Mr. PECORA. I offer them in evidence. The CHAIRMAN. They will be admitted. (Photostatic copies of documents captioned "Union Industrial Trust & Savings Bank, Flint, Mich., General Journal Ledger and Statement of Condition ", were received in evidence, marked for identification, respectively, "Committee Exhibit No. 104, Jan. 19, 1934", and "Committee Exhibit No. 105, Jan. 19, 1934.") Mr. PECORA. The first of these exhibits, the one marked "Committee Exhibit No. 104 " in evidence purports to be a copy of the general journal ledger and statement of condition of the Union Industrial Trust & Savings Bank, of Flint, Mich., as of Thursday, December 31, 1931, does it not? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir. Mr. PECORA. The second one of these exhibits, the one marked "Committee Exhibit No. 105" of this date likewise purports to be, on its face, a copy of general journal ledger and statement of the condition of the same bank, of the same date, namely, Thursday, December 31, 1931, does it not? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir. Mr. PECORA. What is the amount of bills payable and rediscounts shown on the general journal ledger and statement of condition marked in evidence as 66 Committee Exhibit No. 104 "? Mr. WILKIN. $2,100,000. Mr. PECORA. And what is the amount of the corresponding item shown on exhibit no. 105? Mr. WILKIN. $1,500,000. Mr. PECORA. Now, why is there this conflict between these two exhibits with respect to that item? Mr. WILKIN. They are two different statements Mr. PECORA. Do they not both purport to relate to the same thing? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir. Mr. PECORA. That is, each one of these exhibits purports to show the general journal ledger and statement of condition of that bank as of Thursday, December 31, 1931? Mr. WILKIN. That is right. Mr. PECORA. Why were there two separate ledger statements of condition of the same date containing these conflicting items? Mr. WILKIN. It would be only a guess. I don't remember, but I can guess. When this item was not straightened out the way it should have been, in all probability the bookkeeper went back to reflect the true condition of the books and made up the statement as it should be, and without this $600,000 entry. That is the only explanation I can think of. Mr. PECORA. Do you note also that on exhibit no. 104 the item of "Certificates of deposit, commercial", is shown to be $308,832.74? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir. Mr. PECORA. And you notice that the corresponding item on exhibit no. 105 is $908,832.74, or exactly $600,000 more than the amount of the item as it appears on exhibit 104? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir. Mr. PECORA. How do you explain that conflict? Mr. WILKIN. Well, that is the only explanation I can give. It would be the same as the other, that when this entry was not taken care of in Detroit the auditor went back and had a proper statement put in his book. That is the only thing I can say. There may be another reason, but I don't know. Mr. PECORA. Which of these two exhibits do you regard as the proper statement? Mr. WILKIN. Well, on December 31 I regarded the one showing the $1,500,000 of bills payable as proper. Mr. PECORA. And the certificates of deposit of $300.000? Mr. WILKIN. Nine hundred thousand and odd, that would be. Mr. PECORA. That is right. You regard that as the correct one? Mr. WILKIN. Yes. Mr. PECORA. Did the bank have two separate ledger sheets for that day? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir; apparently. I have never seen them before, but there are two sheets there. Senator COUZENS. Which one was given to the public in the statement of December 31, 1931? Mr. WILKIN. I could not say, Senator. The statement is there. Mr. PECORA. Mr. Wilkin, did you ever discuss this $600,000 certificate of deposit transaction with Governor Grossbeck, the receiver? Mr. WILKIN. Yes, sir. I would say it would be in April or May of 1933. Mr. John Farley, of Flint, on behalf of his client, was suing Mr. Mott, who was president of this bank. Farley came in to see Governor Grossbeck about it and about the bank generally |