The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-03-01
United States Court or claims.

stee.nge.
United States Court or Claims.
R. r. WARD FrTz @. HALLECK AND JACOB LITTLE,
AssidNEEs OF JACOB BARKER, vs.. TIE UNITED
STATES
The petition Of plaintiffs respectfully represents 10 this
Judge Backtord mistook the law In considering that the
holders Of stock in the ten million loan when favor
able er s were allowed for other parts OF the twenty live
million loan, were not entitled benefit by the dspre
cation Of The bank notes the treasury received for further
a o. INA. oan ana mat subseqaent transfer Of
condition which had accrued your petitioners therefore
ask q re.hearirg in relation thereto
The whole bayiDg OF necessity TO 90 back 10 Con-
gress your PETITIONERS respectfully also ask re hearing
on some minor points or views set for by your hools
tanning modification thereof lest they should have an
rnfavor able influence on Congress
Az defect in the transfers from the stockh
to your petitioners, can although ut great cos. and
trouble, be remedied. supposed that this court
had equitable as well as legal Jurisdiction, ana that
the absence Of other claimants for forty four years
enough had been proved TO establish the equitable rights
claimed by your petitioners.
deed acknowledged before Judge OF the Supreme
Court being sufficient to prove te II was supposed he.
conveyance acknowledged before commissioner Of this
count would be sufficient in law az well as in equity.
Il was great object 10 avoid the large expense Of
taking full testimony would be required, II there
were other contestants The charters Of most of the
banks and companies which held the stock had
expired and their affairs passed into the hands of
stockholders, many Of whom dead and the other
stockholders had been scattered the world many Of
would be very difficult affair." and 10 make II necessary
for suit 10 be brought In each case would be an endless
All which dcues coud r rssr aovsnse
should be made be obviated by the Observance of
rule laid down In the bill for the relief OF your petitioners
reported to Congress by its Judicial Committee and by
Congress referred to this court which rule TO give
the additional supplemental stock those who held the
ns
twenty five million loan, leaving the parties 10 divide II
among themselves, according 70 their respective rights
hto hoan In ofne tho.,
pronounced by his honor Judge Lorng in this case
would have protected the rights Of the treasury well
those Of all the other parties II it should be finally de-
cided that as the Judgment rendered supposes that
anser Of the stock subsequent TO the allowance Of
favorable terms carried with 1t the benefit which had
accrued giving to the same persons who received the
ten per cent supplemental stock, would be acquiesced in
by your petitioners and in either further evidence
10 the validity Of the transfers 70 your petitioners would
not be necessary.
The following request is TO be found page q OF the
original brief filed In this cause
"Should this honorable court fix any other day when
more favorable terms were allowed, the plaintiffs ask
time to obtain from the treasury list Of those who held
stock in the ten million loan on such other day. and per-
mission 10 file the same in this cause"
Relying the 3rst of August the proper day, which
day should be adopted By the court the requested time
would have been allowed TO furnish proof Of who
the stockholders on such other day. that proof was not
established that Mr.. Barker held stock in the ten million
loan when the supplemental stock Of ten cent
Piled for, and that the issued TO him las per
certificate herewh) which was in accordance with the
opinion pronounced BY this court This proof would have
obvated Of the fatal reasons urged by this court for
considering that there was not any cause OF action.
The treasury books show that great majority OF the
ten per cent supplemental stock issued to the persons
title, but few transfers having taken place between the
3lst of August and the 30tn Of November, 1914.
supposed that this Court overlooked the provisions Of the
law Of the 26h of Debember 1874 which made the loan
authorized by that law and by the law Of the 18th Novem
five million loan authorized TO be borrowed the oath of
March, 1914; hence il follows that il any loan under
either Of those laws made favorable terms
the holders stock in the ten million loan were entitled
to the benefit thereof
In referring MFR. Crawfords report this Cnurt seems
not TO have put on Mr. Dallas report, TO be found in
Book Of American State Papers Sd vol q Finance, page
the CONSTRUCTION your petitioners think = meriis
"Mr. Dallas says In his said report that Of the
received as aforesaid for parts of the twenty Eve
million loan, sl4o,Slo 90 was sold at IS. No other
of s25 OO which Richard Smith testified he had purchased
OF Mr. Dallas the day after peace had been proclaimed
the banks of the District OF Columbia, when such paper
was at discount Of "a per cent must have been part
the Si4o received as aforesaid for portion Of the
If it under either two the other other loans the
holders of stock in the million loan would be entitled
struction Of Denis A. Smiths testimony should be sus-
tanned, this would supply the deficiency with increased
force.
Your honors TO consider the proof insufficient to
establish that Mr. Barker paid in money The contract
consider
proof complete that the terms Of the contract had been
fulfilled by Mr.. Barker The legal deduction therefrom
In the absence Of proof TO the contrary that was full
filed with money. The acceptance Of bank notes
money precudes subsequent plea that such notes
not legal tender In addition, the original certificates s
sued therefor by the Treasury, which proof say
many dollars were due hm-consequently, due him in
legal currency Further the proof full that the banks
in which be paid the money TO the credit of the Treasury
and which were at the time approved by the Treasury,
did not suspend her payments until the oath Of July,
and all these certificates bear date prior 70
sury allowed interest thereon set forth in the certiH
Gates further evidence that the money received
long before those banks suspended specie payments their
notes being universally known to be equal value with
specie at the date Of said oan Proof of that fact
deemed necessary; 1t be easily furnished required
DC considered turning point in the cause, your pet
TONERS respectfully ask Of this honorable Court TO
produce further proof As in duty bound, your peti
~ JACOB BARKER, Counsel for plaintiffs.
TREASURY DEPARTMENT,
RBGpsTRs OrIC1, Feb. Is, 1859.
thereby certify that the books Of this department ex.
hibt Jacob Barker holder the 9th day Of January
1916, Of stock in the ten million loan of 1914 to the
amount Of three thousand four hundred and nine 90lo0
eolOo applied for and that the same was issued 70
him. f. BIGGER, Register
The Law Courts.
SUPREME COURT-GKNERAL TERM.
Before Hon. Judges Roosevelt Q J) Davies Clerke
OWen H. Beach 20 Norman W. Washbwn and others-Order
The People Francis Didion-The defendant tried and
bill exceptions was slen and the case brought before his
Court.
e Be
which the trial bad with eons 70 proceed and render
JeRn TtS rs eo Hau-Mo.sou denied without preiu.
dice 70 the plaintiffs rights to apply 70 he general term In the