The New York herald., 1870-01-27
suPsSAE cOUiT-clIaaa:as.

The Lottery Cases-rhe Morality OF GaH-
biiDg-flo,ion 20 vacute the Order Appoint-
ing John Morrssey Receiver.
Zac'aaradh Il. Simmons rS. Benjamin Wood et
al, and Henry Cotton ana Samuel T. Dickinson us
Zachariah Z. Summons C. H. Murray, W. l.. SIM
mons ana John AnderSOn.-The lottery mudde
came up yesterday, upon motion to vacate the
order made on the 10th or December, 1862 appoint.
ing John Morrisscy receiver over certain lottery
property, grants and franchises the particulars OF
which have already been alluded to. The order was
made Ill the case OF 2. L. Simmons vs. II. Cotton
Wood and others.
Mr. Shea, counsel for the motion claimed that Wood
was the owner OF thirty-seven and half shares of
the lotteries mentioned in the complaint, which
situated beyond state and in States where
they were perfectly lawful and therefore not with
out legal pr0iect0n. 1t appeared that there was q
suit by Jonn Morrlssey upon bill lodged oy him
against the parties concerned PRAYING that the
property might be placed In the hands OF receiver,
In order that 1t might De disposed OF and the whole
matter might be wound up. In that suit OF Norris
sey against simmons Wood was appointed receiver
on the 9th Of December, 1863 Subsequent to that
ferent from That filed by Morrissey. Counsel went
on TO state that he procured out OF court
without notice the appointment OF another receiver
not only Tor the preservation OF the property, but
by the order he was empowered TO dispose IN his
discretion either by public SAFE or by private con-
tract OF all that property over which the court had
already appointed receiver. AS he counseD under.
stood the manner by which sucn . result was
brought about was ths-On the 1st OF October, lS6S
Messrs. Simmons and Wood, TWO OF the deiendantsln
the previous case, agreed, as between themselves
that Simmons should sell oug whatever interest he
had acquired in The business. 1t not pretended
that that private arrangement between the parties
was regarded as settlement OF the suls and
brought the controversy to an end. Counsel
cohtended that such an agreement did not by
any means terminate the litigation commenced by
MorrIssey, lnasmuch as the whole OF the subsequent
case against Wood was based upon that TRANSACTION.
MT John Anderson, he was informed, owned some
thing In the neghboraood OF $4,000 OF the lottery
shares, and therefore was party TO the original
suit although he was left OUT In the b, fled by Mr..
simmons The point to which he wished to refer
was the extraordinary ceerty with which the order
appointing the second receiver granted, ana 1t
appeared tnat such were the relations existing be-
tween Mr. Anderson and Judge Barnard that MADE
1t not proper that any order should be issued by him
In this case. Woods affidavit showed that he was
possessed OF thlry-seven and ha shares and there
was no dispute that those were aWius in the States
where they were granted that ne was appointed re-
ceyer over the property, but that on the 10th OF De
Morrssey receiver the palntr IN the former action;
Ina. Mr.. Anderson was related TO Judge barnard.
Judge Barnard be vacated, and that the receiver
previously appointed be continued.
Mr. Mr. dssns4 sHN gssIssa s M9tloa contendng that
entirely defeat IT. The afndavits OF y. E. simmons,
Jonn M0rissey, w. L. Summons, Jacob Bausch, w.
Francis and others showed that In September, 1865,
sait was instituted by M0rrissey against o. E.
Simmons ana others, which suit grew out OF . dnl-
Guilty which originated between Morrssey ara
u
by whicn the latter agreed to pay the former
certain shares Tnat suit never came to decision,
compromise having been entered into between the
parties, and the litigation was brought 70 an end.
It had been said that Mr. Anderson, being the father
inaw OF the Judge, the order by the latter was
void. He (counse did not understand such TO be the
law, and the suit OF Morrissey had nothing what
ever to do with the case. In 1868 tnore various
granted in different States OF the Union. Those par
ties, each acTing Tor himself, came into collision,
aud thinking IL would be better 10 consolidate their
0c IN
transfer each his property 10 three persons IN trust.
The trustees were Murray, Simmons and Davis, and
each agreed that the business should be
r1ed on by the trustees for ten years. The agree
ment further provided that although the business
was vested In the hands Of the trustees for ten
years, yet at any Tune any person or persons hold
Ing seventy live per centum OF the dlvlsble interest
might revoke the trust IN question and win up the
business. Moreover, II also provided that any per-
son holding an interest in any other lottery should
convey 1t TO the trust and or refusal to do
20 to forfeit his interest IN the In the
OF Cotton and Dickinson there were atldavits show
that they acquired any divsloe interest under
the deed OF trust There was also clear and con-
elusive proof thai the palntln had no title under
the deed Of trust After some further argument
counsel insisted that the suit which mad been instl
tuted by Morrlssey had been settled and compr0-
Inlsed, and now more than a year had gone by with
out any action having been taken; that when the
came before this court the lact OF that compro
mise mad been concealed. The Court mad not been
informed that TINS suit was virtually extinct.
Ex-Judge Porter, on behalf Of W. L. Simmons and
John Anderson, submitted that the rehei granted
against them In a court OF equity was UNJUST. 1t
was conceded In the complaint that neither 0! them
was concerned IN the illegal business In which the
plalntns alleged themselves to be participants He
was at loss TO know from anything he could learn
either IN the papers or otherwise, why the name Of
Mr. Anderson was introduced as q defendant
Counsel on the other side had relieved him In that
respect for he found In his argument an allusion,
the party he represents tnat ne was In some sense
connected with 1t, and that his name could not be
INTRODUCED IN any other form.
Judge CardOzo-I have not heard any offensive
allegations made In regard 70 Judge Barnard. II