Morning herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, 1840-12-09
Court or Chaneery.

Before the wee thanceiior.
John yVaTren rs Francis n Mitchell and Others
This was a suit of conside rable importance to a
number of n.onied individuals IN Wall street and
elsewhere. II was instituted by the complainant to
test the validity Of assignment, and also the
port Of I nc Master thereon. The instrument had
orr ginay been made for the purpose OF securing
property 10 certain privileges creditors, To the eN-
clusion Of others. The excluded portioa applied ia
this Court for redress, and il was referrcdto Mas
ter 10 enquire aud report who were such prvis ged
ereditors aad what were their legal and equitable
claims The Master had made bis report which the
complainant in this suit differed from, iuasmuch as
the Master had admitted certain claims of Prime,
Ward King. aud others, toa very large amount, as
privileged creditors. Ga that report his Honor now
proceeded to adjudcatr, aud after due consdcra-
tina the Court say, that Edward Smith, one OF the
claimants is entitled 90 s,an2 ia the preferred Ga
f,r the whole ofhis demand.
As TO the claim Of Prime, Ward & King, as the hol.
ders of two notes made by blydenbers q Burns, IN
favor Of smith 4 Nicholl. These notes the Court
think are not evidence of an iHdcbe incss of Smith
& Nicholl TO Bydcnbcrg & Buns, but directly the
reyrtss aud IN order TO entite the latter 10 claim as
crsdi ors for these notes, they would be required "a
prove that the notes were mere accommodation
notes Now, Prime, Ward & King were bound e.
prove the same facts which they have not done
ward indeed says he IS informed and believes that
these notes were intended TO be among the preferred
el ins. This however, is not evidence 60 the Court
Of IN. fact required 20 be proved and the master
not warranted. upon that statement, IN reporting
t.e.e notes a. ofthe preferred class Of elaims.
The notes presented by Astsr * Son are In the
same predicsleht, and for the same reason must IL
disall0wCd.
In tao claim ofthc Merchants Bsnk On a note o.
Smith x Nicholl. the Court say these parties sIt
shown 90 uf the preferred class Of creditors, and
their claims such, are properly allowed by The
master in his report.
In The matter OF the claim Of the Manhattan Com.
pany fo-nded on notes of Smith (. fioholl in favoi
of Blyudsnbcrr & Barns. Tins claim the Couri
| think was also properly allowed by the master.
| In the claim of Daniel smith, the Court dee"
L. ffsfag and ink. ls
| claim has been very properly allowed by the Mas
ter. Lastly, in the aim Of Robert Smith, except
cd 10 bv the complainant; yet. ~ this suit, a. hi
counsel in his argument was foresd to admit On tes
\ timouy which fully supports the claim, and thu
! Court Of course allows u to stand.
| The result said his Homer, is that the Master
repor, is deemed error Gus az " regards the allow
| ance Of the claims Of y .1se, Ward King. AMI al
so If Aston n Son. as preferred creditors. In al
otker respects, the Court say that u must De cen
/ frmed.
One Of the counsel asked about costs, and hi,
Honor said that the costs must abide the event o
! the suit. ,,,, r
| def. pdant in this case is highly respectable
coored gentleman, Of some celebrity IN Wall street
and this was application from receiver ap
pointed by the Court, 90 compel BIN TO answer Ger
| tain delicate questions
His Hosor said that the defendant having execut
| ed assignment to the receiver, and submitted him
| self to a further examination, is bound to answer
all proper questions touching his possession or con
troll NJ any property to he delivered TO the receiver
| or the existence or whereabouts Of any property
the title To which may have passed by the assign
| neni although the defendant may have answered
before denying the existence Of any such property
| The Ceurt therefore, order that the defendant ap
| pear again before the NJ .ster, on fresh summers
or else that an attachment issue az ust him, ana NJ
paw the costs thereof, d also OF a,s application.
! Crrqu,i Richards u.s. Somi. Cooke W and Syiranu
| Gedney.-Tbi. was an application for a receiver
| which the Court granted as 10 Gsdney' The cost
| to he taxed. -
II, this case the Court ordered that the defendant
have leave 20 amend, the costs 10 abide the event
| Charles ID Birdseye, VS. Gideon Mead ana ON
,ys In this case, his Honor decided that the caus
,nnst he Dismissed; but, said bis Honor, there ar
| circumstanees which ought TO excuse the complain
AIT from paying the DEFENDANTS costs. Each part
| must bear their own costs.
ri. Honor was occupied the reminder Of the da
| in hearing Of motions