The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1849-05-17
Circuit Court.

May 15.-Wauple rs Burfon--Ths cause was given
them that II the person who pupoSassd tbs Foods IN
dispute made representations to plaintiff, knowing
them to be false, and with design to enrsp him into
sale OF those goods intending to pay for them
or If the person who acted agent made those repre-
sentatons III falseD 1t the same, and they to
be considered the Of the principal
Were these representations false and they
known to be false and made with deliberate design to
which you gather from the whole Of the evidence
In the Alter tho able and lucid commentaries of
the counsel on both sides the testimony, 1t Is
for to into the recapitulstion Of It,
You will take up the testimony Of the several wit
nessos beginning with that Of Russ, and from at
tentive consideration Of ell the facts testified to by
at the time destitute of the to pay for those
goods. If you find those facts in the Affirmative, such
sale would amount to felony, and would not clothe
Chrysal with any title whatever; and In that event,
though the defendant u bona fde purchaser,
tai But there Is another view to be taken of
this case. Although the circumstances under which
Chrysta have obtained those goods did not amount
to felony, still he may have committed such fraud
would divcrt him Of any title; that u.s. there may be
chased them he did not to pay for them and it
Of great Importance for you to distinguish between
those two In making the distinction 1t will be
necessary Tor you to consider attentvey the conduct
Of Chrystal at the time he made this purchase IL he
made it with pre-conceived design not to pay. no
matter what his means were, the contract would be
void And to enable you to just conclusion
you are to take up the evidence commencing with
Crystals career, and follow him all through until you
come down TO this transaction BY the testimony 1t
appears he was not dealer in dry goods. He had
been II seems engaged in another pursuit, which had
reference TO this kind Of dealing and the witnesses
characterize his former occupation not very repu-
table one but although his former of life may
this For the purposes Of this inquiry, you may
into the amount OF capital he had at the
other persons previously his dealings with the plain
til; all these will throw light the motives with
which lac made this purchase. The next question for
your consideration will be the circumstances
der which the DEPENDENT made the purchase from
thrysta and whether under the crc umstanccs he is
bono fde purchaser not f the defendant in passing
through canal street went into Crystals store
would the store Of other person such goods
as he wanted had no notice of fraud aud saw nothing
to put him inquiry lac would have good title pro-
yidcd the vendor hal not felonously obtained such
goods The question, therefore, (supposing you come
the conclusion that Chry stall did fconiousy Oh
tain those goods will be- DID defendant purchase them
without notice and without any means ascertainng
because they obtained by the lover species OF
fraud and that defendant purchased them without no
ee and had not such ,ncaas within his reach as would
put prudent man on inqu:J :hen he would b. bona
"a, purchasor, and the la~ would give him legal ;e
Sealed verdict onorro" Vhis) morning.
Before Justice iurbui.
Ma, 1G.-U'amyic B.1ton.- Eleten OF The jurors
in this canse came into the court this morning with
sealed hut it could not be received IN
Il Tic other juror. TIE assembled juE'fS were G's-
,Laf.sd until TO morrow.
IA, ic. Ceorge ~ B,ainara rs. .aierandcr g. Ra~s-
deR-Ths is an action o. repievin to try ths utie OF
ard taken ty plaintiff from defendant under writ OF
reuIeyin IL appeared the defendant carried on the
business Of druggist and grocer at Buffalo, and
20 this city TO purchase goods; he was introduced TO
plaintiff Wholesale grocer, by man named Wolsey,
and ~ plaintiff alleges he represented that he had
capital Of So 0C0 and free from debit he also gave
references TO ficrs Bogar Of this city with wnom
ho had pre- yiousy dealt and others Upon these repre-
ecntations the plaintiff sold him four bills of goods be-
tween the 18th Of April and the Gath Of May 1877,
amounting TO about 1Tco. Shortly after the delivery
If the last parcel to one Of the transportation lines,
pla c.riained that defendant had failed md had
made assignment Of his rtocS In trade to his father;
wbcreupon hc despatched Of his clerks Buffalo,
and appeared that tho last parcel Of goods did not
to hand aud the plaintiff clerk stopped them In
transu AZ icckport. lie next proceed to Buffalo,
and found portions CT the previous parcels and caused
them TO be rcprvined. The defence that the goods
were not fraudulentiy purchased by defendant; and
secondly that his father bona fd purchaser OF
tho goods for valuable consideration After the case was
summed up, and q brief charge from the Judge the
jury found verdict for the plaintiff vauns the g"o@s
at 81 600.
O Dudl be Innr.nr