The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1869-12-23
THE COURTS.
IMPORTANT DECISION IN BANKRUPTCY.
Sentences in the Court of General
Sessions.
Two Highway Robbers Sent to the State
Prison for Twenty Years and
Bigamist for Three Years.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT couaT--M BANKRUPTCY.
Tho Bininger Case Decidcd-verdIct for the
Creditors.

Creditors.
Before Judge Batchford. 4f
IN the Matter or The Petition ar Hardv Blake d Co.
~. Btntn0er q Ciarke.-The adjourned hearing Of
the case was resumed yesterday. by permission OF
the Court on the previous evening the petition was
amended alleging thar Biniuger had committed
certain acts OF bankruptcy other than those set forth
In the Grst petition
MIR. Compton, on behalf Of Mr. Clarke objected to
the petition being amended, ana proceeded to dwell
NJ some length upon the question or Jurisdiction,
conending that the petitioners must stand fall by
their first petition.
Judge Blatchlord said he had no doubt whatever
Of the power OF The Court.
Mr.. Compton then drew up amended answer
and Mr.. A. D. Clarke was recalled rs q witness. lie
stated that the complaint fled IN the Superior Court
against Blnneer was made for the protection OF the
creditors and To his rights In The account
ing with Bninger: ne was unacquanted with the
mode OF procedure ana simply applied for receiver
proper course 10 pursue. Previous TO the time that
payment was stopped there was persistent enort
MADE TO dispose OF the lands In Virginia belonging
to the arm.
In reply to Mr.. Bangs tho witness stated that it
was almost an ,lnpoSslbiity to sag whether or not
the 1rm was Solvent at the time payment was
stopped. inasnIuch as Mr.. Bininger was the fiscal
manager OF the concern; witness consulted Mr. Bin
tnper aS 10 what should be done. but he would not
listen TO him. he INTENDED 70 propose IL sale OF the
assets Tor the benefit OF creditors; he dil not
think however, that forced sale would have helped
the trm out OF the difficulty
Mir. James Il. Morgan, counsel for the receiver,
was next examined. lie stated that he had acted
for The receiver, VINO, under the order OF the Supe
ror Court TOOK possession Of tne property. The re-
ceivcr, MIR. Hanrahan, had acted under his advice
Clarke he thought was not acquainted with the re-
celyer before hs appointment.
Objections having been raised at this point MIR.
Compton said lie desired to snow that nifty per
cent would been paid the creditors by this time
had the receiver not Deen restrained ny the presens
proceedings
Judge Blatchford observed that there was no doubt
the receiver had been legally and properly ap-
pointed but that nothng should be referred to prior
ment was stopped.
MIR. Morgan further testified that he saw Bln,nger
and Clarke in the establishment after the appoint
hieht OF the receiver aad prior to the ming OF The
petition III bankruptcy.
IN cross-eXaminallon the witness stated that Mr.
Hahranan was lawyer, and Mr.. Bangs wanted TO
SHOW that the receiver, being MEMBER Of the legal
profession, was consequently inexperienced IL the
liquor and grocery business, whereupon Judge
Batcnf0rd remarked that lie not going to siI III
Judgment on the superior Court
MI compton then put IN evidence the petitions OF
the Bank or America and OF Jones, Beecher " Co.,
fled upon November 90
Judge BatcnIorl said there was no question Of
TACT before the Jury He desired TO put the in
such shape as would strip It Of all questions Of
fact, 80 that the Interpretation now given It would
dispose OF 1t Tor future occasions. Upon the law OF
Tue case therefore, lie would direct verdict for the
Creditors.
MIR. Compton considered that 1t was proper to pre-
sent the question OF intent To the jury.
Judge Blatchlord sad MS view was otherwise. 1t
seemed to hiul there was a clear case IN point OF
law, since the evidence was all the one way. There
were three considerations IN the case. The first
whether Einingcr IL Clarke were lnsolvent when
they committed the alleged acts OF bankruptcy
Oniy, whether they suffered whether they pro-
cured and suffered their properly to be taken upon
legal process, and thirdly, whether that act was
done with intent to defeat and delay the operations
OF the Bankruptcy act. After defining the meaning
oil insolvency, which was the Inability to pay IN
legal tender debts matured witnout reference to
Possibility or probability Of future ayment, the
debtors IN this case were unable TO meet their en-
Eagements on the 4th OF November last. As
10 the second point, 1t was admitted that Binin-
ger & Clarke suffered their property to be taken
upon Legal process, as the appointment OF the re-
showed As TO The Intent TO defeat the opera
ton or the act II had always been held under such
that the denial OF the intent Itself
OF no avail since the party who knowingly and will
fully committed any act was aware OF the neces-
Bary inevitable consequence that would result. In
this case Bininycr and Clarke SUFFERED the transfer
Of their properly upon process OF law. There was
only one duty he could perform, and that was to
direct verdict for the creditors upon the ground
that. beng nsolvent on the 10th inst, the debtors
suffered their property to be taken. upon legal pro-
cess, with intent, by such disposition OF their pro-
perty, TO defeat the operation OF the Bankruptcy
law Of the United states.
Mr. Compton then asked the Court to note his ex-
ccpuon to the charge, which was accordingly done.