The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1871-06-08
Another German's Property I'm the
Hands Of the EsefieatOr.
The Actors in the Haunstein- -Chahoo1
Drama In g. New Role.

In the Circuit Court of the city of Rich
mond on Tuesday Judge Wellford granite,
an Injunction and appointed receiver In
case OF considerable interest, PARTICULAR,
In view of the fact that several of the par
ties interested have been conspicuously be
fore the public In the famous Haunstcir
| forgery case, and that in several respects
the two cases are parallel.
The ,complainants are Frederick Holzap
fel and Anna Katherine Dorothea Eliza
beth IIaroth Holzapfel, his wife. Mrs
Holzapiel, who is resident of Gettingen
Kingdom of Hanover, Germany, represent:
herself as sister and the only heir at law Of
Fred. Haroth, decd. This Haroth was
| German by birth, who many years ago left
! his native country and came to Richmond
to live. In course of time he gathered to
himself some little property. His real
estate consisted of two houses on Broad
street, near Elba Park, worth perhaps
81 900 or 81 200. In September, 1864, lie
borrowed $1,000 in Confederate money
from Frederick Braucr, and gave deed OF
trust to Mr.. C.. Sauer for the amount. In
the summer of 1866 he died at the hospital
of st. Fraucis de Salcs-intestate, unnatu u
ralized, without friend or relative in this
country, and leaving no apparent heir or
claimant to his property.
they can learn nothing Of who rented the
property from the time of Haroth's death
until early in 1867, when Samuel NJ. Page,
cscheatOr for the Commonwealth, came
upon the scene. He rented out the houses
until January 1869, about which time he
learned Of the existence of the note for
81 200 executed by Haroth infavor Of Brauer;
and having bought the same of Wellington
Goddin, attorney in fact for Brauer, assign-
ed it to one A. w. Bailey, without recourse.
The amount paid for it was sevcnty-nine
dollars. In December, 1869, Bailey filed 4
petition, it is said, in the handwriting of
Page, alleging that Page held the property
rs eScheatcr and was about to proceed
against it according TO law; that he Bailey
was the legal owner Of the note by virtue Of
an assignment for i valuable consideration !;
that llaroth's personal estate was eXhausted;
and that the 81 900 was still due the petit
toner. Accompanying the petition was
the deed of trust to Saucr, to secure the
note. Bailey, therefore, prayed the court to
enjoin Pare from proceeding with the es-
cheat sand to give him the petitioncr)
Judgment for $1,000 before any Common
wealth claim was allowed. This petition
purported to- be sworn TO by Bailey. On
The same day it was fled, Page answered
In due form that ho had taken steps to
cschcat the property, but that when he had
commenced them he knew nothing of the
deed of trust-the houses and land having
ut that time been in the county. He further
stated in his answer that he believed Bailey's
claim to be just, and knew OF no reason
why the plaintiff should not have the re-
dress afforded by law. AL this was sworn
to by Page, us was the other by Bailey.
On the same day that the petition and an.
swcr were filed, an order was also procured
for the payment Of the $1,000 to Bailey.
An Injunction was granted against Page as
e>chcator, and one IL. ". Hey was appoint
ed special commissioner to advertise the
property, pay the costs Of the suit, and the
debt alleged TO be due Bailey in full.
Matters stood thus until May of the pre-
sent wear, the commissioner in the mean-
time strangely falling to carry out the or
der of the court in any particular. The
sale took place, however, on the 18th OF
last month, and Bailey bought through q
third party, but no money or title had
passed when the bill referred to in the first
paragraph was filed, SO Holzapfel and wife
were not too late to recover their property.
They now charge that Page and Bailey con-
spired to get the proceeds by Il fraudulent
suit on the note, when Page was the real
owner thereof; that Page for four years
rented the property out for Sl6a month
and appropriated the money; that all the
proceedings of escheat arc nulhty; that
the small amount oil Confederate money due
by IIaroth to Brauer has been paid several
times; and that the compainants are the
lawful owners Of the property.
Mr.. Page, it will be remembered, was the
principal witness for the Commonwealth in
the Chahoon case, and A. w. Bailey was
the person in whose favor the note alleged
to have been paid by Chahoon to Page in
consideration of his su>pcnding the pro-
cecdings of cscheat against HaunStcin's
property was drawn. The counsel for fla.
roth, alleged heirs are Mcssrs. ii. A. Il j.
5. Wise. The defendants are represented
by j. \. Cosby and +. Z. Turner.