James Hildebrand was its founder, some thirty years prior to his surreptitious retirement, and for the first twenty years of its existence he was its president. At the end of that period in the history of the thriving and honourable business, Mr. Stevens became an active and important member of the firm through the death of his father, who had long been associated with Mr. Hildebrand as a partner. The other partners were John L. Drew, Joseph Schoolcraft, Henry R. Kauffman and James Hildebrand, Jr., the son of the president. The business, according to Mr. Stevens, was then being conducted along “back number” lines. It became necessary and expedient to introduce fresh, vigorous, up-to-date methods in order to compete successfully with younger and more enterprising concerns. (On cross-examination, Mr. Stevens admitted that the company was not making money fast enough.) The defendant, it appears, was a conservative. He held out stubbornly for the old, obsolete methods, and, the concern being incorporated, it was the wisdom of the other members (Hildebrand, Jr., dissenting) that a complete reorganisation be perfected. The witness was made president, Mr. Drew vice-president, and Mr. Hildebrand secretary and treasurer, without bond. His son withdrew from the company altogether, repairing to Colorado for residence, dying there three years later. The defendant, individually and apart from his holdings in the company, owned considerable real-estate on Manhattan Island. His income, aside from his salary and his share of profits in the business, was derived from rentals and leaseholds on these several pieces of property. Values in certain districts of New York fell off materially when business shifted from old established centres and wended its fickle way northward. Mr. Hildebrand was hard hit by the exodus. His investments became a burden instead of a help and ultimately he was obliged to make serious sacrifices. He sold his downtown property. The depreciation was deplorable, Mr. Stevens admitted. The former president of the company soon found himself in straitened circumstances. He was no longer well-to-do and prosperous; instead, he was confronted by conditions which made it extremely difficult for him to retain his considerable interest in the business. The company at this stage in the affairs of their secretary and treasurer, proffered help to him in what Mr. Stevens considered an extremely liberal way. It was proposed that Mr. Hildebrand sell out his interest in the company to the witness and his brother-in-law, Mr. Drew, they agreeing to take all of his stock at a figure little short of par, notwithstanding it was a very bad year--1907, to be precise.