, 1872-11-17
NATIONAL INSURANCE co.
4 Struggle to Throw The Affairs Ct The
Company Into the Hands Of
Receiver.
Objections Raised by the De-
fendant to Such Pro-
ceeding.

| TIE TRIBUNE published particulars OF several
! suits entered against the National Insurance
Company, with the object OF having the affairs
OF the Company placed in tho hands OF q Re-
| ceiver, for the benefit Of creditors. Yesterday,
| two OF these suits came up before Judge Will
| Jams, on demurrer to the bills, namely, Chamber
I Of Commerce ?. the National Insurance Com
pany, and Isaac P. Coates '. Same. Defendant
| demurred that the compliments had no right to
| throw the Company into chaucery, as it
| was not insolVent, and there was no proof ad-
| duced that it was unable to pay it's creditors.
h1r. Goudy, instructed by Shufeldt l. Ball,
T! solicitors appeared for the compliments, and
| Mr. E. ". Evans for the defendants. The Court
| having called the case, arguments we're heard
In reply to the demurrer, Mr. Goudy argued
at great length on the necessity and justification
OF throwing the defendant into chancery, show
ing that the complainants had no relief at COM
mon law, and that they we're remedy1ess anywhere
but in Court Of Chancery, and supporting his
arguments with numerous illustrations OF the
physical impossibiity Of creditors having JUS
tice dealt out to them, otherwise, under the
existing state Of the laws affecting debtor and
creditor. It the state OF affairs shown in the
bill by the complainants was not equivalent to
insolvency, it exhibited very queer condition
for solvent company to be in; and if the
creditors we're debarred in the first place, from
discovering the position the company really was
in, by Interrogation or otherwise, and were, in
the second place, refused the benefit Of
searching inquiry through the Chancery Court,
in the future they would be wholly helpless, it
would be useless for them to hope for Justice,
and fraud would always not only be possible, but
reviewed the legal aspect Of the matter at issue
exhaustively, and then turned to review Of the
facts. He pointed out that although the Nation
al Insurance Company Was not actually bank
rupt, its position WAS we'll known to be such that
it ought to be there.
Mr.. Evans requested the pardon OF the Court
for interrupting, but he must ask permission for
| q moment (emphatica1ly). The National In
ments that would be rendered against it; it
! would be able to meet all its obligations; and
so would the Mutual Stock Company. The Ma
tional Insurance Company WAS not in bankrupt
cy. Thu other side had nowhere shown that it
! was insolvent: It was able and would meet all
| its legal obligations, and the Stock Insur-
| ance-
Mr. Goudy Qaughing) said if that waB so the
creditors be represented would be satisfied to
withdraw from these proceedings, provided bis
| obligation to see their claims satisfied.
Mr. Evans assured the gentleman that what
| he was saying was absolutely true. He repeated
| with great emphasis that the Company would
pay ILL Juub 441t AA6ut Qo A011At4eN5 dAA
/ that, if the Company appealed against such
| judgments, they would be prepared to give good
| and sufficient bonds. Where, in the name Of
heaven and justice, he said, did the complain
ants find ground for these proceedings, under
such circumstances as these? He vigorously
combatted the idea that the Company could be
| thrown into chancery, its notes handed to Re-
cei7er for the benefit OF creditors, or any other
| hostile movement of the kind made
Mr. Cloudy WAS at loss to know which way the
rra7tnrs rat at tha f11n6a that hal0rred
| to them.
|, Mr.. Evans said, not that way, at all events
not through chancery. Such thing as appoint
ing Receiver for such purpose, under the
/ circumstances, was unprecedented.
Mr.. Goudy thought it Was very goodand suf-
fcient reason for the appointment OF Receiver
when no officers OF q company could be discov-
ered and that was the fact respecting the de-
fendant in this cause.
Mr. Evans denied the Inference It did not
follow that because there we're no officers there
| Was no company; in this case there was cc1@-
pany, q company that could be found; that had
assets; that could and would pay all legal OBJ
lga ations; company that would find the money
| lift had not the money, and would at ali
| events, pay everything rendered against it; a
I company that might appeal suits, but which,
when appealed, would give approved bonds! On
ceiver? Where had they shown the company
to have done anything of q character
that could be called fraudulent or
inso1vent? Where had they shown anything
that would entitle.. them to a Receiyer? No
whore. Even surprising that Chancery was
available for relief in such case, which he did
not admit yet there was no justification shown
for the particular mode Of relief here sought
1Ir. Cloudy asked whether the bills did not
show that the company had positively nothing?
Mr- Evans only qualifedly admitted this aad
he referred to the facts and figures IN the bills
to show how little foundation there was for the
courae taken by the compliments. He eaid that
the company were shown by the statements of
the complainants themselves to have S105, 900
cash in hand when the State Insurance transfer
was made.
Mr. Goudy wanted to know where the property
OF the Company was to be found for EXECUTION,
Mr. Evans submitted that WAS the very point,
The complainant had no right to an execution,
and, therefore, where was his ground OF action?
When the complainant got his execution, the
Company would meet him like any solvent
debtor would do; and when they estab-
lished their judgment. which they never would
the money would be forthcoming to pay it.
After further discussion, which consisted
chiefly Of reite5aton of the aboye in CONVEX;
take the matter under adyiseme1t, and the