The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1850-11-22

We have rsh to lsok into It. and see that It vas 70
payment Of those debts he sold those lsnds. II 81
third party, where both knew IL was not necessary
there is such collision between both cslls on bott
zion under the deed which gives then osiorabs title
TO hold over our property and therefore spprshsnd
We have right, and ought to be allowed to proceed,
and have this matter inquired into, unless are
stopped by matter Of multifAriousness Now. here Is
the ground OF collusion-We charge that the sales
we're made TO the companies when the proceeds were
not wanted to pay debts; and, therefore We have
right to inquire into the truth Of the after There
another objection which defendants counsel makes
about this being fishing bill; but don't understand
1t to be bill Of that kind for there is OF
allegations in 1t but IL seems the objection is that the
allegations are too general that take to be the cha
racter OF the objection Now there are certain eases
where general allegations will be allowed and the first
laea wish 10 present 10 the court that the several
patterswe charge the very nature OF the case
within the knowledge OF the defendant and without
thoso specific inquiries on part they not within
our knowledge The general rule In such eases there
fore is where the facts within the ~ledge OF de-
fsndant and not within the knowledge OF the other
party general allegations ao wed but
OF the rule have excuse on the taoe Of the bill
and will now call your Hopor's attention to folio
twenty ak OF the bill which slledges that Charles
Carroll after he qualified as executor received largo
sums Of money SC Now there IL, appreb end ample
cause the face Of this bill for thee general ssgs
tions You will there fore find that wherever those
general all cations made. that from the nature of
the the facts within the kuowledge Of the de-
iendsnt and not within the knowledge Of the plaintiff
which evidently warrants the plaintiff in calling
the dete ndant tor discovery and in the p
1t Ia manifett from the blu that testators
scattered all over the United States and OF
tremely diost to give precise information respect
to 1T and therefore the plaintiff ought TO bs excused
from setting with great description
ofths property Therefore fishing Oh
lection must fall to the ground These the
marks have TO make 70 the court this part of the
case The next objection taken by counsel the other
side Is multfariouspess In making the companies par
ties to the buit lie contends ought be
done Now IL is sometimes very difficult subject to
decide the question OF muitifariousness in a court
OF Equity for plaintiff does bring all parties be-
tore the court the objection immediately made that
ne mas not the proper parties TO ths SUI; and,
the other hand he subjects himself In this to
the objection Tor multiiarioutness Now how the
two objections to be foeonciled IL often happens
that the claims OF parties separate apd itinct
and yet there is one general principle running
Guilty arses In storys Equity Pieadipgs IL is laid
down that who're there Is general ysia by which
the parties are united although their interests may
in the case OF parties having rigt a commonage,
&c there they must be oiaed ana ,he nerat doe iue
is one general right although the PARTIES may have
separAt. rights demurrer will not hold Nov In this
care you have one general right Ia which, although
thofe are distinct interests yet the liability OF both
parties is general The claim maAe against d.
lendant Is Tor one connected demand, aud If his an.
swsr Is necessary 20 inform us whas hs dad nay,
it Is neces,sry Tor us to 60 into the 10 airy
in regard to the other doiendsnt5 to Enow
and real estate, and although We might not have
right to any OF tho personal estate still would have
right to call for 81 account CT III for Instances when
necessary Tor Us to know how much OF teststors
debts at the time nnpaio aud will be necessary
Tor us to know how nucb OF the proceeds vii remain
alter meht OF hos. debts aud after general dis
tribution and &c IL impos.ble for to got this In
formation without going into those general accounts
hEd Tor that purpose TO have his answer. have new
shown that det ndsnt 10 charged with constructive
trust, and that he cold mOrtgazed, aud rented aud
received ana paid and snt to know how much
he has paid OF those debts. and how much remains
Cue sppreht nd. therefore that the charge Of null
NERVOUSNESS has no application court ~ 90 atty
may entertain suit agsipst all parties VINO have
Interest, TO enable IL to give relief only have
I" make few bIief remarks tn. statute OF limte
tons set up BY defendants counsel. L suppose the
COUNSEL will net contend that there Is any bar in The
way. although ne end-svors to bring himself withg
the revised statutes Now let look at the revised
statutes ana there IA nothing according to my view
retrospective In heir operation The answer 20 this
objection IL that the revised statutes apply atogsthes
20 subsequent 10 their being passed and not TO
cases occurring prior to the enactment although
admit Chancellor al wori h hat held differently.
Mr. WOOD then went into len theoed Argument 10
chow that the decision OF Chancellor Wal Terth, on
that question, WAS unt.nsbs, aud concluded by In
shifting that, tustsinipg the demurrer would work
rrpsrnbe injury and oppression. aud that therefore
the demurrer ought 20 he ovtrtuied
Mr. Kirkland, Or the part OF the d-fsndant. briefly
replied TO the arguments Of pltiutin council con-
tending that the d. marrer wa we'll taken, aud that
according 10 the iuiss aud praetice Of pleading 4:
ought 10 be tnsttintd Decision reserved.