New-York daily tribune., 1858-08-25

Fren tie - oers a,sd bythe c0mpsr" = 80
Asi CD tbS g7,h 4 Feb, lsJ1, ar. E's*sh v,,,,oSs
,: t's defendant CosgIl, ioe msssioe ~ t.n,a.-
Inasry occrp.ed by Ro.end r. C'E Asa :. aI5jO.
,ile ,,r anien ns use . pay year fon' u s.ss
az sia ousrteIb; that 81 the tsn.s ol sln.1ry
lion t1s ice -bouse ~es tued WIN io,srs5.ei
sEd il sa. sereeo between the .anIy 10 t. 10
n a. a ,oould lie lsft ~itL TIE same ae mop
She ,o.y,s ~ the wear the plaintiff pu'cns. Co..
e, ana ros conpl.rs inst the o,rs.io9 -
az faIe 10 coy his sst qlaftsf '3 c.s doun and
s437 JO Isft the ice house enpy go &e. or allowed
rmvV:o 40 Ard therefore clsius damages 70 tue
sJ5ebt spocibea-
srvsrvr oousr-CaAnzSs-Ass 2L-sef's Judge
btfhN'1 C,EsgE.
s. Hal 'Ds e''s s.s s'isss asre @ o''''' H''' 40
Tbs WAS an application 70 dischsfgs desnt.S, dst.is,
ESssr, fion arrest. The afdsue OF tee pan .lnS
ehsrp.d that Mr. Edgar, on the Sh day OF Apru iss'
uor 5n 70 DO toe printing and press-Toik o' tho
nav, paper eslled The IVay Of Lie, by
thss he ldefenGsot) WIS, 10 company *1.n ne.,o,'
psbhsher Of said paper; that oeispoan' ~" Yl
s,uttd taat be hsd put al the capital ID sso l1uiha
h,us.If ana tba. ne was sbundssty soie ID iheet al
>bIgaiians; that defendant was enRsse' ~ tno -
bu.peps which ves paying BIN !sfgey, gu tH,. No
was able 10 carry on the pspsr " nus Vmn da1o
that ip consequence of suca representation, oePo1
.est vas INDUCED 10 perform Work 70 the amonh. "
Al 200; tkat the plaintiffs had alec purcnauE E .np
forts Of type and msteris5 10 the Sno1-' Va
th,t naymept had been aket ef bogaf, pSe Luz
na,,ber c the defendants hsd pad the DEBT; thss az
~ Eogsrs .epres AZ ntsiions were untrue, sno tHs'
the rueaus Logar nsd paced 20 lM T"y .hT
ws,a saue uJtes OF ole Walker, who was 'Ot1?
nre.ponsbs man, and whose notes Tould not oe p1a'
ESys- having ss walker ssd, made false TePfo7eDo1
t,oas % induce Walker to buy ont me tbIe II ~
isr which the notes In ques.on "Sie svon, -,
b. b4lsyed Edgar msje such tsI.e Iep!tna pta "'A'' '
Nth intent 10 cheat and deffsud t1e pisiDIp' -,
TIE affidavit Of EJgss partner mf: hsffiss, ai-
lazed ths. be eogsged ID psfthership Wat m'' E'gH
tho capacity OF So or ong il fu ard corroo
Gys.es the ali isvit OF the p!sinsip5
MI Edgars reply 10 these charges hed aiso osen
puphs ed 10 full, by which, IL VII Dc recoiec o. ne
Dc niss he ale stions Of the plaintiffs charging hl with
In sSdition TO these sf}lavits, council for Edgar
read the sfEdsvits Of Edsln w. Green, who statsd
that he wes clerk io Edgars Once, ana tnst no @-S
pressLt when Hall applied for toe printing OF Tue
naper; that he was referred - MIR. Cook defe1dant
rot having time 10 talk with him; and that he heard
DIsriiffs say that they had to psy commission Tor
ipg. The affidavit OF a. s. Flandrsu was slso read
By which il sppesred that Mr. Hall brought note OF
EJgsr Henies to deponent and requested TO get II
ted, and as proof that the Ioe was gooo the
ty him for The Way Of Life, ard tbs! the Mercantile
Ar Dcy had reported Edgar az beng worth eigat or
uiSe thousand dolars that Hall never stated to him
tAst Edgar had made any representations respecting
his lEd2aT'sl responsibility; tast Hall subsequently,
brought other notes Of the defendants for the same
yurHsss but depobent returned then 70 Hal, no, hav
isg got them discounted. This att lsvit cOuoboratsd
that Of Edgar 10 respect to the interview between the
the two defer dspts as stated by Edgar.
q. e. Baker, Of counsel for plaintiff read in opposi-
tion to the motion tie sfdsvit Of Nathan Is. Walker,
wbO testified that on the let day of june, 1873, he
purob sse the stock in tI ade and good will from Ed
gar who represented that II store was doing a good
busiLess and that although deponeut entirely uu
with said business yet the profits would
bs large enough to enable the aePOnent to pay the
votes given as confederation; that Mr Edgar told
aepsLent that his confidential clerk, George IL. War
Ie0, Vas fully conyessht with the said business aud
was competent to conduct IT. that he was OF ire
pIosohsble integrity and honesty, and 10 every way
rebable; that EogaI had claims on Warren and that
he would induce Warren to enter into deponepts en-
poy AID coLtIue in said business and assist hun IN
The rems; that, In conversation win
Warren the later consented u sAtar depOnent EN-
pIoy that depoLent told Edgar he had 10 nssuo --d
YeGuested him 10 fix the time Of payment 80 that from
Edgar kno ledge Of the business aud profits OF the
lsi6 business, the notes could be met at msturi.y,
which Edgar did stating that the notss eond oe easily
pad from the profits Of the business as they became
due that relying upon teee representative ne CON
peted the purchase of the ad business and delivered
bis notes therefor ard be further alleges thatae repre-
tentstops 20 maze by Edgar, respecting tse value
bu the numbef Of his cpS,oners and the piof
lie dervsd from such store were wholly fsse ardfsaad
uent ard were made for the purpose and with TIE In
tent to deIsuc deponent snd to induce kui 10 par:
chsie sad business He further says that Edgar hsd
net Travelled in the Southern and Western SsAtes, o.
elsewhere, for the purpose OF sohetng order c9m.s
sioIs 40, for such business be represented that
the Of g. 900 had not been expended in advertise
meLts sns ciIculars Lor had defendant realized suii-
cent ts all his business or personal expsnees and
hsd eaid store his haLos free OF debt, but on
the sostrary wss largely indebted, and at that tine
was in failug circumst and unable TO meet his
Lahi ties; that when the said sale was made Edgar
well knew that deponent would not be able 10 meet
tho said notes at maturity from the profits OF the bGs
,s e. an that Edgar knew that he Edgar had not
"a ccrfdepce OF business men IN the South, Nes or
'slse where, be represented, but on the conuay,
knew that his business lad been Conducted IN such
manner that ne hsd lost all confidence among
busIrtss men; that he had made al assignment for
Il pet OF hs dtors TO his brother tns no had
prered credoIs to an amount more than sufficient to
cNer s his property, and had lett 81 SoO "orta un-
pAid; that Edgsr knew Warren to be dishonest, and
hot reliable or Fl. TO be trusted with SAID business.
Depcr ent alleges that SAID notes were obtained by
represe ntsons and that for the want OF conslo
-srston ard the wortheasness OF SAID business the
contract On which they we've founded Is void MIR.
Walker aso deposed that be had sdvised Edgar to
oek over bis books before assigning but Edgar stated
II was DO use--he had all IN his head.
The sfidavit of Mr.. Heiries was then read, in which
he denies that the notes given by EogS were made
by the firm, but that they made and delivered by
kdgar, notwithstanding he had no authority 70 make
the same in the firms naIno. The affidavit of Mr.
Sparks was then read, showing that Edgar had con-
sctsd for the printing of circulars relative 10 the
" Way Of Life paper fer cash on delivery, was
stated by this deporent to Edgar and Cooke; that
when payment was demanded, Edgar ssld that he
would not then pay the BILL Is ae business was done
on trpe and that the same has not yet been paid.
The sidsyits OF the plaintiffs then read, denying
Eogars alegstiors and corroborGiiog iormsr atida'
vs. HIS Honor, after ne srng the argument of coun-
se iCr both parties took the papers and reserved MS
Getition.
DECISIONS.
Albert Csrdozs sgt. ALVIN Hlggins.-Let an order
he entered sccordAnoe with defendants proposal 70 deposit
Of Judgment Defendant o. puAes to counsel lee
r attending Referred t. Charles A Peabody
Defendant eio coats Of a motion And OF eneug
SsdSment-
Elias Ii. Main sgt Lucius l.. Bulkley.-Mo.Ion
<enied With go eosiN See oTiuion.
Henry Maitland ast. Richard III. Hopkins O, al
-siotiop denied With IS costs. = ahidc event.