New-York tribune., 1870-05-26
THE COURTS.
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT

Before Judge Bcncdict-Ethercd Wood
ward, charged with selling counterfeit y cent stamps
the case of Edward l.. Ungewter agt william Won
sachs assignee in bankruptcy of John schcpelor Co.
BStchford has rendered the following cpi on:
This is a final hearing on pleadngs and proofs IN s'!t
in cnutv The suit brought to determine whether the
plaintiff assignee in bankruptcy of Schcpclcr Co. If
inrd In certain moneys in The hands of the defend
ants counsel BOwdOin LarOcquc Barrow. The plain
tf being resident OF WuIzburg, in Bavaria, and having
Iss @ and I'd @ S h to invest for him in the stock OF c Metro
pOltau Gas Light Company, a New YORK corporation,
at par of such stock; they did 80, subscribing
for, So shares of the par value "t ~" ea'h
for bis and speaking Of The 6 shares in hef 't
time % time on the 90 siaTcs ana a"l lNeu Ill! :" sI
collections. They in fact took the 6d shares u thr own
name but he not advised as to whether the shares
were in his name or not. lh'y mao. Aihti' -
tion in their names for 81 shares, o "nch te 20
party and 10 shares to thcmscycs. Tic ss shai' C."
stock were in their names ON tc hooks oi the Com
shares in their name from the Company d. isd3 As
early October, 1894 Schcpeler g." N "It'at'1 LIS
certificate with the PLenX Bank ot tlr titJ ot Now
York a., security for money then loaned [ mat bdnk 10
Them and it always afterward remained IN ihs P',se
sion of that bank it, successor lHcnN Naoha
haua, m uS 80 " , 60 fi,ne TIC last reno NAL was i'm NAV
1855 loan which never paid IN lul dt amounted Ia
SCI 200 the time Of the failure Of ~clcp'lci GO.
Schepeler d Co. failed ON the 1it ot May lG on th"t
day and at a time when they were insotent ana knew
theinsevcs TO bc sO or else were Contemplating lh-O
Veucy as inevitable one the hrm went e. the Office OF
BoWdoin, sarOcque Barlow th, legal advisers "i thc
frIn and after making known 10 thcm t4e tttuI tA'Ir
pecniary affairs, and the tact tiat ie fh,N Ndll"hIi
EauE held on pledge the So shares o. tHo 1ppo'an
Gas Light CO. stock and other socyrtc. which eaily
belonged to other persons than 3'h' ,tf 'v W 'i'o
tine hands Of BOwdoin LarOclur Barlow certain seen
Iitcs which, the proceeds O" which me, requested
should he used to T. place OF rel .I' : =,
stock and the other securities 50 rN1.N '"ioi einE 10
other persons, ara also s,lieI . ~ ~ W -, ~ 20
LarOcquc q Barlow MIlItch oI -i ,L '' =. q
ing 1t 10 deliver to B"wloin i'rocIue " h"r"" t.e
The IS shares OF stock we're not delivered MP
by the bank, and were not replaced o. ftpur'ha>cd
fcrcd redeem such stock fcw days amer The failure ~
schcpcer Co.. and TO pay III hlgh market price for
two later, aud refused again Ihe securities 80 placed
m the hands o bo"Holi lati"y9no - l,i"" aa,
after dcductng what cNp"rdGi Ia inc red mpu"n q"
money which win Interest 10 the nth ot November,
1859, amonncd on that day to slisrl 20. That sum
was that day deposited hg Bovhu.n, L9rccqur & Ear
low in the NeWYork Life Insurance and Trust company,
70 their credit, payable attcr 10 daj notice Vc
therefor certificate Of deposit wncn they hold subject
20 the decree OF tins Court a~ "a who Is entitled 10 the
that thc money iu the hand ri Bow oin laro-quc
low represents the IS shares o. stock and Lat the pro
portion OF IL whIch IrllescI R -l't ".hi u" h' phi
H. him, and ought not to 20 to ~. a, ign 40 hdnuty.
Schcpe.cr co. toward th" pdluiiH yet on the f'cts
Of e case Schepeier Co WHOM theF c.ne n,olvcut,
were merely debtors to the p'a'uhh for the value
OF SO shares 0i i s,"oh T ms, a'r.,,. in I,'t
ruufcy ard as respected tho rights II such other
creditors under the Bankruptcy act I!- sc me Ia M
selves %hoe saG ~ i'. Pee ~ 'n ."H r, e' t
Il
rrIor Ia bc time when rlnt, o The -gEtc ln bans
rtcy iutcrycucd put iuto the hands OF tc IainI oF
nf S agent Of his of any person win Is assent "l
rriorit \ nor WIS the p1cL" of tiCn a., li's 4i u
land. 0f Buwda.n, 1ITOrGuc 4 BARROW Ld"o hLoNh l"
thc lainth OF adopted oI faln. uy h lIi"r 10 iH'
trtsfr of the tic g. them go TIC a. PHet III haIt-
ruutry The property ia them war IN no udhhcf
changed nor did any legal or "qu Die men, or lti''
or tr.t or charge arise 10 respect tu them Mhch W"ud
moi have been rcyOcabc by Schepcicr ~ Go. ihrh
selves at least at al Times before the udtactlOli
was made known {" the pEintn " Wa h' lh'ir
known to the plaintiff, og 10 any agent o MS, u S'e
time after the appointment of m assignee Il p'"h
ruptcv. such appointments Hs, IN We Idct-' NC con
sdcrcd as "A revocation 0f anything done Wy > eI"'f Z"
Co il auV such rcyOe.tiUl were needed Moreover thc
delivery of the securities having been made ior Trcl
fled purpose and the purpose not having D'c ciliid
out because OF the refusal of the BANK ~ dtle VIC
shares, the property ia the securities remained WIN
Schcpcler CO.. and passed 10 t' ah'Igh,' III u1!h
ruptcy, free and clear from my CbHf" III IdN"t o h
plaintiff. Independently nov ever, 0i these views, iIt
Court s In fact asked 10 do ia iaVOr 0I te phh Nn9
the Bankruptcy at expressly ioILidr IL j. hrh'" t
give the plaintiff, creditor preference IL 80" J.,
! cicr & Co. had given directly to tAt pldIniI
himself the securities which they plncch ia lh'
hands OF BO@dOH, IrOcque BARLOW, lhey
bchg then insOlycnf, ln acting In contemplation 81 IN
sOlVency, aud Intending 10 prefer the paintH ana nc
having the knOWlcdsc which B0wd0ln, lTotqW, ~
BARLOW had, the trans ctiOu would have been dud on
the aC ana yOid, and the aSsgnccs could nave ittOn
cred back the securities, then value nom the pdiht
Tie lLl must Dc dismissed with oOstf. 49,
D. kOelker for plaintiff; T. {. T. Buckley ana j. h
mn Tor the assignee iH bankruptcy, aud ". W. Mel Al
Iand Tor BOwdcn, LaI0cIic d Harlow.
TF-fTIp 4