The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1869-02-20

10 Phlu DO more tnhu " 70 WhNu amount WAS ualu
polos and that The books OF the Great Ba!la OIL
ore autharizng The CONVEYANCE OF any OF the above
receipt Of money IL M IeeeS or from ins mescnsois
nnd bankeI9, o, rom any other person or oompsuy
o. the 9ssa S Go%
letter from Leeeh dated % January 81. 1855 Which
says, DEEDS 70 All the lands Hre being placed on
ior Transcript of same, and forward on receipts OF
Manley brings evidence to show that
there are no oonveyances on record In venaDgo
Deeds a. Franklin, PennsyiVauia, dated January H.
snyt6iDs inds1ed 10 the N resSns aud BsRk n T
Petroleum COMPANY" Marley prodnced the check
given by him TO Mr.. Leech in payment, dated 10Th
Ptrhap9 no 6ase could be presented which more
fully exhibits the danger OF the BoR-d OF Brokers
uDdertnt "a TO investigate matter not within the
Of limiting It's inv estigStoes to failure e to o5mey
With stock contracts ana other Kindred matters as Il
goverr ment than the complaint pr senied by NJ.
MAJ ley, and which Mr.. CAV reports as having been
The complaint, stripped OF all yerbiage Is that the
plaintiff ObiRi, ed from Mr.. ManlIy the OF 1880
1y falsely pretending that ne had paid il5 ooe for
in fact he had paid but s2i5 for it aud that he mad
paid brit s93OOO for eases interests ia tho Great
conveyed none Of Them and the plaiutiG mad never
No one who al ali familiar with the speculntlons
10 oil lands and in leasehod interests iu oil wells
few years viii have any dinicuiiy in Gomprshendiog
by ihe pisintT to Mr. @sSisy respecting the pir
chase Of the tract of land couia be true. yet
siso s the facts alleged by Mr. M@nley could be true
In hume erous cases valuable contracts In writing
for the purchase OF oil and and leasehOld interests
passed from hand naud alu. ost freely as IL they
Gnred being sn o ssgiSnment q the contract In writ
e9@eny paG %Sove the osna 2
tTsc price agre TO be paid for the land interest
John Reynolds but ,sS Tor the fOpty three acres Of
Price for s he mace sss b9 ReS
i nGias Win Dsy,son Bel; But what sum did the
The Contract That IA the material inquiry, Which d
Srse mar msnsy o hhs 0S 70 M N0s
to this very material point; Nor wa7 even esser-
Until tio contrary BE- shown. the Pre,umpnon is
G fSF this eonI1 a9d 81 Tn sqc Would be the Judgment
ndicment against the piann for on obanug % Sn t6s ns
money by 6lse preten eS, either demurrer 10 the
jury " Sss 3 &c pant Saqss
point as above set fSrth but would Instruct the Jury
This ailegationq respecting the leases and nteresa
% Ws S SF vey s ah
the claim and report made to the Board aIoye set
and inteIest0 purchased conveyed, aud paid
@ for G5 %6
sufficient certainty. 1t may be Is pianiT
does so
pndchased r then ,, from other persons to whom
may have executed leases OF these Interests.
s sGhs TO these No
these alters set forth In report yet miu
feotive statements to cor denim The painth A Court
Of law either on delnu rsr :, an Indictment or oe.
would have overruied them ior insuiclel cy and
One o. her matter m'ins to be considered TIE
aige tha, The Sla nti submitted ri oset
Its com pmiee appointed TO inv estga'e the ma ter.
world be escpped froS denying 1ss iarsdcsioa OF
sa Of e BUsa Sy sesh an think the
The committee made their first report January Is.
that hey had msetng on TSesday last ns WEIGH
DSS Mp es M mpe ms
RS sfhSgfs sd T9 & to a
'TSe % Committee a yesterday received acommunloa-
lawyers in whicG they deny the right Of the Board
to In the matter as II was nota stock trans
THE committee submit the communication and
Msnley to the ccmmittee." -.
to The com miiee Of the same date as the report suo
hitting the v Tit en- opinion OF his counsel and de-
Ss CsPh ssrs
port. that In conn LANCE with the order OF the
them them and nd mske % bis reply 10 nv Nansy ststs@en,
and that they received from Mr. Lsech the Two notes
SIN The sSseace Of any stat nsnt from Mr.; Lseoh
on beg to the
Bead asking 10 be dlacnarGed from It's further con.
Mr.. II. L Cav, the third member OF the committee.
made m mSGy Tepe saa In Tnen smSag anca oasF ns
your commtiee have Jurisdiction IN the mattsr
between these parties and the same having been re.
committed to us for further nveSLigation Mr.. Leech
appointed time when he would be ready TO meet Us.
nOe Saying IN ss s d To the his
not 10 ADMIT the Jurisdiction OF the Board"
three notes nom the plaintiG o. January II isso
aE king the committee to postpone les contemplated
quite n1weli, and was obliged 70 M an engagement
out Of town en- Friday snd that ne would se happy
agreeable TO them on saturday a..
Ore Of January z6 1863. informing the committee
that he was unable submit his dihculty with Mr..
MEDleV 10 eTbiretion because t was impossiole for
out an order OF The courts. And the tn .rd dated
January q, 1862 in whjch he agan declined the arbi
with highest respect for the Board OF Brokers and
for the ms n6eIs Of the committee. .0 ..,o,,. and
coTIespondencs that there was persntent m Es.SsRt
submit ihe matter to the Jurisdiction OF the B ,ard
Mr. MRnley, In his affidavit, makes a somewhat
rat needing but in this he is not HslaipeS BY the
DO not perceiVe that ther by the law ofthe Asso
SatOp BY the lay Ss Of @ tae sSoI or ~ 60
CURED any right 10 aTbI ras and settle the matters
in dispute between the planliH and MY, Reuben
ley to Vindicate his rights and to REDRESS
done TO him. But lhe BOsrd OF Brokers cannot erect
ssi h IN n1E my oppOn light the ."
Sss 81 Ey in he nsS Sa @hoS cost sflHs h
$1,000. He has an interest Ia common with his fellow
Ion and in the clam wnlcH he would have in case
oneCpssity upon the fund set ap rt TO aid poor and
board may thi, X proper to assist He has right
a,so to be protected bis good name and reputation
from unauthorized prOose ing5 AgainsJ him, In
which he caenot nave the assis;ance OF court Of
iiGs every member e such an association he Is
has agsent ed In beco m ng member; aud by the law