The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1844-02-16
Superior Court.

BtioFt JuuBe Jockey,
Fen. l5--andrec Lester, Jabes Hoimts and Gla don
Wheetar Samuel S Parker, james II Walsh and WI
liam Barber-Ths Is an action to recover damages
Tor forcble ejectment The plaintiffs are auction and
commission merchants and complain that the OF
their business they opened store at No 64 Pearl street
which they placed under the Of c. Browning, in
whose and under whose sign the
carried on the real owners being the plaintiffs Brown.
ing indebted TO the defendant Parker the other de-
PENDANTS being police ohc0rs who obtained judgment
against Browning and had Receiver In Chancery up
pointed, whose name William willard, a clerk Of
Parker. This receiver applied TO the Police Magistrate
Judge Lyman and posse OF officers were ordered 10
aid him in serving the legal notices the plaintiffs
nna IN ns a
that he was insolven and that the property Of
which he nominally the owner actually belonged to
the plaintiffs Yet this did not prevent the appointment
of the receiver This receiver with his posse
to seize the property which worth about 5000 and
forcbly elected the plaintiffs who opposed the right Of
the receiver and his officers but the law prevailed and
in the end Lester Holmes Co were compelled In order
to their property to into chancery and after con
siderable time allowed to bring the suit upon this
deficit Of SlO00he claim of Parker being about 5000
The present action will determine the ownership OF the
property and also who Is entitled to the $1,000 The plain
ts do not seek to against the police officers who
merely the agents OF the defendant Parker The
ceiver willard is to be found The book.kceper en-
ployed by Browning proved the the part of the
plaintiffs. But from his testimony, it appeared that
Browning made out all his bills Of sale and kept the
counts OF his business all in his namethat Lester
and Wheeler accustomed to bid at the sales Tor
goods which were knocked down to them but
ved bills rendered for such purchases The de-
enCe were ABOUT 10 OPEN Dut OtneT
pied nearly the entire day the Court WINS adjourned
tomorrow II is alleged that the Transaction fraudu
lent the part OF the plaintiffs.
Before Chief Justice Jones
The Farmers Loan and Trust Company VS.. Thomas X.
Mintpn-This was action a noie given by the de.
PENDANT dated July 1889 for loan Of 50 800 secured BY
the pothecston of seventeen hundred shnres OF the
stock OF the North American Trust and Banking Comra
NY The defence set up is, that the loan made
certificates of the Farmers Loan and Trust Company
which the time selling in the market dis
count Also that the debt or note paid by MIR Hami
Murray in the January of lsaO, by the depose
$780, and that said loan for the benefit OF said Muir
ray.
The plaintiff called Mr.. Delafed, who proved the deb
the part of the defendant He stned that the stock
the Farmers Loan and Trust Company was at about i
per cent discount at the time the loan msdetha
Hamilton Murray paid moneys into the company hi
account but never made deposite for the debt
Mntum.
| Mr Hamilton Murray placed on the stand by tn
Defence anI underwent long examination to his in
in the suit The testimony not being yet complete
develope the entire transaction, the Is adj ourn
ed until ten o'clock tomorrow, friday.