Civilian & telegraph. [volume] (Cumberland, Md.) 1859-1875, 1862-06-26

| !
10 the pay ment of their pretended commissions
rs Trustees, to which they were in no name
entitled, advertised for sale in the Uem0crati
AHegoniaR, a newspaper publ shed in ALE
gany County, II valuable portion of the rea
estate OF complainant, 10 wit: Part of n trac
of land called Commercial Mart" lying il
the county aforesaid, on which is erected The
valuable coal shipping wharf OF complainant tc
lie sold by them, as said Trustees, on Tuesday
November LIST, 1859, on terms TO be made
known on day of sale; said Trustees being
then, and for a long time anterior TO and since
October 9Th, 1859, aware that said complainant
WAS able and ready ut all times to pay and
satisfy all claims secured by said deed OF trust
and that the complainant has been fer the
same period DESTROYS TO account with them
and every of them, and to settle the same; and
that said Trustees have rendered no account
TO complainant showing anything due them
or any OF them, on any account whatever; and
also that no indebt edness secured, or protested
to be secured by said deed, justly due from
complainant remains unsettled and unsatis-
fed.
The Bill further states, that said attempt thus
made to interfere with omplaiuant's property
is wilful abuse of the power which might
have been otherwise lawful y exercised by said
Trustees if the same had been required for the
pay ment of any Just debt secured by said deed
u I
ance OF said property from said Trustees with
out any commissions or compensation to them
that all expenses, of which complainant had
! ever been advised, which were incurred by
said Sherman, Mehaftey and Bloodgood, or
any one of, or any two Of them, in the service
of complainant and for its benefit, in any ca
pacity whatever, nal been paid by it.
| The Bill further states, that an entry had
been made in compliments books, by the di-
rection Of said Sherman and Mehaifey, dated
! March Goth, 1858, of - 800, as paid Sherman
! in full of all claims against the complainant.
of every kind; and subsequent to said entry
about October /, 1858, Sherman admitted him
self indebted to the complainant in the sum
of 1861, on an account, nearly all of which
was tor monies of complainant unlawfully
used in Sherman's business at Alexandria in
1856 and lS57 by direction of said Mehaffey,
Bloodgood and himself. The bill also states,
! that Mt date of deed of trust, actual outstand-
ing debts of complainant provided for in it,
did not exceed much, if at all, 100000; but
n small part of which was paid, until paid by
stockholders, under the act of January session
| 1858 chapter 2j2, authorising the conversion
! of a portion of the stock Of complainant into
| rcferred stock. And all debts paid otherwise,
| secured by said deed, were paid by complain
ant itself and all conversions of its assets
into money, were made by complainant itself,
! and not by under authority of the Trustees;
I
vcntion Of snid Trustees. That said deed OF
! trust was cuntrived by said Trustees, acting in
concert with each other, rs n means CT contin-
! uing their control of the Company's property
! and business, as against its creditors, and pro.
! tccting them in the enjoyment of their fra nd
! ulcnt udY antages, and was mover intended to
be executed, but used u protection and cover
| against creditors and stock elders, of their
breaches OF trust and mi-management that
/ hen said deed was made, said Trustees were
all officers of said Company, and during tho
time they caim to have acted MS Trustees, Il II
acts done by them about the business of tn c
Company was in their capacity as olliccrs:and
that they obtained possession Of money, and
paid thcmsel' es duriug the whole period large
! salaries as officers, to IL greater amount than
they would have been entitled to as Trust es
if they had acted under said deed NJ Trustees:
and larger than they were entitled to ~ Of
icers-that said deed was fraud on creditors
and on complainant, cOncoctod by these Trus-
tees. and they can claim nothin. under it. The
Bill also states, that Mehailey Bloodgood and
Sherman are all non-residents of Maryland ::
! that the two former, rs complainant is advised
and believes, are nsolyent, and Sherman pos
| sessed of little pecuniary respons ihilty; that
! each and all of tn en- are largely indebted unto
! complainant for monies taken and used unlaw =
fully, which came isto their possession as of.
! fcers Of complainant, which, it has no reason
| to hope, it can rCcI yer, except tC small ex-
tent, and that if commissions are given them as
Trustees this will in fac ncrcaSe the large Losses
already sustained by their mis- management and
nefarious dealings with its property; that COM
plainant il VIGOROUSLY responsible for all in
debtcdness secured by said deed, and that Il
recOnveyancc Of the property ought TO be de-
creed to he made by said Trustees to it, and
not delayed until the time which may be re-
quired to ascertain the other relic, due it in
the prcmses-all which acts of said Mehafc +,
Bloudgood and Sherman are contrary to Equity
&c.
The Bill then prays for Injunction
straning said Trustees, their agents, &C., from
selling or inferno ddling with any of the prop.
crty left undiSposed Of or it's possession &c. :
and fer Il decree for tho reconvcyance of the
property, the annulmcnt of the trusts created
by the deed, and an account of all monies be-
longing to complainant received by said Trus-
tees, or any of them. in any capacity that said
deed may he set aside rs II fraud; and if said
Trustees, or amy Of them, should be entitled,
in the opinion OF the Court, TO any compcnsa-
ton as such, that complainant may Sc Oh and
discount therclrum, such sums ~ they and each
of them, said Trustees. have received as salt
rics or allowance during the time; aud such
sums n lso said com planant can show have
been lost by it, by the fraudulent stock gam
bling sales and purchases hereinbefore men
toned and by the fraudulent sale to sherman
and Dean and the fraudulent expenditures
made for the benefit of Sherman and Dean by
said Trustees as mentioned, and also such sums
Of money as are owing it by said Trustees, and
will be found to be due from tn SIN, or either or
any of them, on accounts to be stated between
it and them, and every Of them, or which may
be due it from them in any capacity all such
discounts to be allowed in respect to the in
debtedness Of any and all of them, as shown by
the proof, &C., and for further and other relief,
&C., and also, for an order of publication Civ
ing notice to each and all of them, said Me-
haffey, Blcodgood and Sherman, being nom
residents, of the substance and object Of this
bill, &C., and warning them to appear and an
swer thu same, &C., and pTays for the writ of
injunction for the purposes above stated, &c.
This original bill of complaint was then
amended, stating in the amendment the sub
stance of the bill, above referred to, and
that it filed in this Court against said An
drew Mehaffey, Francis Bloodgood and Allen
NJ. Sherman; which amended bill was filed in
this Court on April Cd, 1862, and states also,
that said Mehatfey, Bloodgood and Sherman
had appeared and answered said original bill,
and in their said answers, amongst other de-
fences, alleged that one Luther X. Marsh, of
the city of New York, is a known creditor of
complainant secured by said deed Of trust, and
ought to BIO made party defendant in this
suit; and that publication also should be made
for unknown parties who may be creditors of