New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1854-07-21
LAW N7E'ZLIGENCE.
COURT or COMMON PLEAS-srrersL Trss-setore Judge


COURT or COMMON PLEAs-srseiM Trss-sefore Judge
$500 MeaasAs
William H. Merritt az. Martin Thompson ~
Controversy in relation to the proceeds OF shlp-Mo-
ton vacate order to hold bail and to dissolve
ton. Plaintiff Of thirds, and defendants
of third Of ship Mischief She went 20 San Francisco
in 1881 under charge Of defendant who authorised
for plsp for that purpose She wss under contract Of
sale the time 10 Ogden Haynes of San Francisco,
for $40 600
n is alleged by plaintiff that defendant wrote him. after
arriving out at San Francisco first that D. II.
pleased with the ship and would take her agreed upon,
but ny he wrote that they had refused TO
,bsse her but that he had consulted with counsel Mr..
J. w Hsvens of San Francisco, formerly OF New-forkl
who had advised him that he could put up the ship at auc-
ton and sell her account Of Ogden Haynes and thas
he meant 10 do So and il she brought S25o0 he meant
10 let her go If not he would bid her in ~ he would NOS
risk too much difference against .. H.; that she wes
subsequently, put up at auction and brought sss,so0.
having been knocked down to Mr.. j. w. Havens. who
bought her in for defendant that defendant subsequently,
took her Hong kong having insured her at two Offices
in Newly rk bis for esq., ooo) and there sold
her receiving her. si50oo but aerwsrd stating thai
he had sold her for but $50 ooo that he romed no part
of the proceeds TO plaintiff except Sass after she WA
sum in the hands Of Henry T. Morgan Co., bankers.
and passenger in the vessel he in said defendant
brought alage amount gold sluss that
with plaintiff he admitted that the ship sold for $50 600 in
Hong Kong but claimed that the sale for $4,000 as he
said San Francisco absolute regarded their joint
property, he had right aerward to take her to Hong
Kong and sell her his account II also said that he
refused to for than $4,000 and aso refused
10 for the earnings OF the ship from San Francisco
to Hong Kong; that except the 81 ss3 mentioned and
"a 600 more paid by him plaintiff after arriving here in
june he has not paid plaintiff for his SAID two-thras
that being agent for plaintiff he could not bay
the vessel on his account in San Fran
cisco and that on inquiry being made Of Mr. Hsvens,
he stated that he bought the ship in on account OF defend
ant Plaintiff claimed that if tho sale for saae5o is
declared to have been legal one, defendant indebted
to him So 95O-if the sale for $50 900 defendant owes
him sl2 ll7 and if il si5 600 the amount due -
plaintiff sa2, H. and that 1t Is hduciary debt lie
= ~x.,o mad nd
PENDANT held to bail in and also an injunction
prohibiting Morgan CO. parting with the money dspos
tied with them by defendant which also was grsuted-and
the present motion is made 20 vacate said orders
Defendant in his answer and on behalf OF the notion
denied owing either Of the mentioned the ship ne
said sold at San Francisco for ssso which was gsod
price for herthat he sued Ogden Haynes for the der
ence and they brought cross suit against him. and nc
obliged to deposit most OF the purchase money
after he got IT, as security and RENTED pantin sne Dan
ance beng the 60 ss3 mentioned. He took tho ship TO
Hong Kong but il was in ballast and he had no earnsgs
from her except about so coolies or Cinnamon a. pasen
GERS clio piece, which did not half pay the expenses
that he sold her at Hong Kong Charles ID. Pohamus
of San Francisco for $4,000 but with this the plsntn
had nothing 10 do the sale at San Francisco was final -
absence he being obliged previously by ness to leave
The that he hsd psy Of 0 IN
is entitled be allowed s773 commissions for selling and
s469 other expensehst the suits at San Francisco were
settled by being mutually whdrawnthat he settled with
plaintiff after his return here paying nun balance On
that plaintiff owes him note Of o. Ooo and that the
balance he plaintiff is s2O7s which he 10 ready and
willing paythat be is householder and has family
in New ork and that he abundanty responsible and
always has BEEN for any just claim that be brought
against him. Decision reserved.
COURT OF COMMON PLEAs-srEcIAL TKsS-Besoss Judge
IscRAHAM.
Max g George Gszier and the Corporation Of New
York
Motion to dissolve injunction as to dumping srest
manure at the Battery and counter motion for attach
ment In violating injunction already referred to- Owing
other engagements the part of Mr. Dillon the sgu-
ment in this case, yesterday forenoon, postponed.