New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-01-10

/ SUPREME -Cmcru-JAS. Before Mr. JUS
ucr PLCNInn.
Wia. s,,al .r I'D A.fl ,g,,a Of. I,l-rick H. 0one
% su 1 a a.t nS 81. T. ' S taa Hi bds
81 NcNi o. and = H. Ou"rnc - b"sioh a. agent Tor
parties 10 charter party, by One terms OF which the
sufficient room on thr J. r. Wheeler for fuil cargo u
coa io Dee received uu tee vessel 20 Cow Bay Cape bc-
place By dricndau TIE plaintiffs were 70 receive ~ 90
pur tuu for carrying Ec coal fee OF all commissions
The vc.-nl Wa- zoo d. loaded nl me hiock House Nine
lclorl1 10 "as also agreed that ifary gterIfc was
Tho comrlut AYERS taat plaintiff. have duly per
formed t,g lilt Ol thr agreement but that dttednha
were rtIdy to receiver tA.t defendant &, indebted
Arms 80 80 ihc amount 81 difference of freight Oh The
which amount Dos refuses Co. pay tAnt there was not 10
feet Of TaieT aI COW BAY ana IN toqigqG i a
receive iuii cargo ihlt also h con,el1. nee oil TINS
salowne-s thc vessel struck bottom very heavily sew
eboiinr coal sufficient 10 csnprte c cargo could have
been delivered Goo tAc yD.rlly lighters, and pa.utls
offered 10 receive U but CuGIut refused 0 20 deliver
ia bat the luur, sustained hy the vessel and the loss
Of 81 sOO for which, with Interest, suit is brought.
ra Is Gs@@ SS I' f'5 [e ly, @ga s cow
BAY; bat that plaintiff dd not place competent
The time Of Tho vessels continuance at COW Bay the
Master intoxicated and ON account OF his conduct
that defendant had this coal ready TO deliver, but being
hY fIpiHIu'H conduct, they delayed
n lbs shipment, damaging iAcmto the extent OF $780,
for which they make counter, laim.
The evidence cas- the captains mftucss to command
the vessel ON account OF drunFenncs ana as to the YES
sci becoming injured owing 20 the incapacy oi the cap
very eoncs y. and G The ae u turning upon The cg
y OF the witnesses 60 these facts the jury, thinking
the weight Of evidence BOO favor Of defendant, rendered
verdict In his favor Plaintiffs were given 80 days TO
T. seymour for plaintiffs; II II. Anderson and Mason
Young Tor defendant
sIEcIAL TEET.-Bcfore Mr.. Justice POTTER.
=. IT, J. m
This case tried I'm November last consuming eight days
was brought to set aside %ogaS arc oF $1,000 given by
the defendant Smith J. Nsnau his father certain
leased premises In Broadst just before his flight to u
rope IN ne summer Of 1862 and ait,r obtaining some
parties, among whom was The paihii Ihe ABOVE IActs
were proved ON the trial and the Justice now decides that
the mortgage fraudulent and void and Thar plaintiff
il entitled 10 have the property covered by 1t applied
George W. Parsons and Edwards Piouepont for plain
tiff; u. ID. Lord FOR attendants.
DECISIONS.
Bushnell ngt Eastman.-Judgment Tor plaintiff See
findings OF fact and conclusions of law.
CnAABERs-Beforc Justice BARNARD.
payment Of $40 costs.
Edward wilder agt. Robert J. Massey ct al; Phlo r.
Ruggles agt. LOWS A. Depau.-MOtlOns granted.
benjamin {. Laston ugt The Star Metal Co.-M0tiOn
David Massona agt. Ninento NJ Julbc - Motion to
yacate denied.
wm. II; Wilson qgt. Arthur Standardization granted;
Joseph Il. yanum agt Timothy Il. Standardization
granted, and reference ordered.
Francis Cementson agt. William H. Wilson ct al; dip
Ahek agt Moses sandson.-NIotons granted
COURT OF COMMON PLEAs-GENERAL TERM-JAN o.
THE sEYBEL BOND CAsE-REsPONsIBII.ITY or BRO
KEHs IN PURCHASING STOLEN BONDS AFTER NO
TICE.
Frederick seybel sgt Tie National Currency Bank
On the 18th of July 1861, number of United States
Government bonds stolen from Mr.. Scybe He i'm.
mediately sent notices to all the brokers and banking
houses In the city stating his loss and giving the numbers
aud description OF the securities lie also tecgaphed 10
the Secretary OF the Treasury He subsequently In
formed by the Treasury Department that bonds answer
ing to his description had been presented for conversion
by the defendants. He Immediately called nc the bank
inghouse OF the defendants In this city and demanded
his property Tho demand refused, and Mr. Seybe
commenced an action In this Court TO the bonds
o their equivalent.
The case was tried before Judge Cardozo and jury
The jury rendered verdict for the plaintiff for $4,000
From this verdict the defendants appealed and the case
was argued before the General Term yesterday
The points upon which the defendants ground their ap
peal are as follows That though the bonds might have
been stolen, yet II the defendants were bona hide pur
chasers for valuable considerations the plaintiff cannot
recover Nothing short of actual dishonesty will defeat
their title
Counsel for tho APPELLANT argued that ~ this verdict IA