Morning herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, 1840-02-14
Court Of Common Pleas.
Before Judge UlshoefI'cr.

Raising the HIND on a Trofting Hoyse--Letois
A. Depau rs James Coddingfon.-The parties in
this are bloods Of the first water, and of
great celebrity in the sporting world. The action
brought to recover the sum Of $1,000, which the
plaintiff assumed to be due to him out Of the follow
ing sin gular transaction. Some time last summer
Mr.. De pau purchased the celebrated horse Wash
irrton, for two thousand dollars Of MIR. Anderson
wAIch he contracted to pay partly in cash, partly in
his notes, and partly in some other medium Some
Of this money was actually paid, and some portion
remains unsettled to this day BE that as may-it
appeared that Anderson gave Depau receipt in
fun, but specifying the mode in which the matter
was settled between them He then delivered the
horse to Depau, who placed il in the stable Of Mr.
Coddngton, and then entered into an arrangement
with that gentleman, by which he was 10 put Depau
in possession Of $1,000 cash down, and to take the
celebrated horse Washington To prove this part
Of the case. a Mr.. Vandervoort was introduced,
who stated that he came to the office one day, and
saw Depau and Coddington with agreement,
which they wished him to hold. No other person
was present. but there was another paper executed
which the witness did not see. One Of the papers
a bill Of sale, by Depau to Coddington, Of the
horse, on condition Of the sum Of 5000; and the
other stated, that il Depau repaid Coddngton Sll0o
in ten or twelve days, why he to have the horse
back; and in default the papers TO be deliver
ed, and the horse to remain the sole and bona ide
property Of Mr.. Coddington
This the sum and substance of the Transaction
although good deal Of testimony adduced to
show how much the plaintiff had been worth, how
much property he had ran through, and how many
horses he had bought and sold before he was com
PEELED to "burst up" and make an assignment.
IL was also set up the part Of the plaintiffs that
the transaction was mere borrowing OF the SioO
on mortgage Of the horse, and that As the sale by
Coddington was made without notice TO the mort
gagee, why the transaction void, and the defen
dant would have to respond in damages 10 the plain
tiff.
On the part Of the defendant Mr.. Bluat moved for
a non-suit. which the Court denied and the learned
gentleman summed up his case without the produc-
ton of witnesses The principal point Of Mr.. BIS
argument was the absence Of proof of the tender of
The elOOO 10 Mr. Coddington. Without this Mr.. II
argued that no case had been made out against his
client. -.
The court charged that the case here presented by
the paintif imputed fraud to the defendant, which
was question entirely for the jury to decide. There
was nothing in the testimony which went to show
any connivance between Coddington and Anderson,
even admitting that part Of the ~ 900 went to pay
the 500 which Depau owed on the original pur-
chase without doubt, said his Honor any man may
decline to loan his money mortgage, and vet have
no objection to take bill Of sale, and give the re-
auisite sum- having valuable chattel transferred
to him. IL the jury should be OF opinion that De
pau borrowed 81 900 for 10 or " days and gave the
horse as pledge that he would pay the debt with
bonus Of SlO0 as interest, then without doubt the
transaction was usurious, and void in law