The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1872-07-30
n.. s,..,., Term of tho United states
$50 60. Not to be Held.


until the November term, while Juose ofy"u
will proceed to Greenvllle to hold tue regular
August term OF the United STATES DiSIt'I.
Court. This announcement is impoi'an', 90 ~
w,, enable the large number OF defenuahls
rpbo have elyen bail to appear, and who are
aecnr,np their testimony and making their
other preparations, for trial during the special
term, to make such other arrangements as
thew NAV desire In view of the change In the
time of their trial, and oil such persons may
place full reliance in the accuracy OF lhls In
formation and govern themselves accordingly.
There are now but very few defendants await
ing trial by the Circuit Court who are actually
In confinement, and those are only such as
have been unable to obtain bail at the sums
demanded by the order Of the court, so that
this postponement of the trials can operate as
a hardship only upon few individuals, while
to the majority OF those who have given
security for their appearance it will probably
be relief.
The Court OF Common Pleas
The arguments in the case of William A. and
Jeremiah Beall against Robb and LoWndes,
trustees Of John Fraser & Co., were resumed
before Judge Graham yesterday. To. give
clearCr understanding OF the case, the finding
Of the referee, WI. Gayer, Esq, is given be-
low: - -
The plaintiffs, Messrs. William A. Beall and
jeremiah Beall, are, as creditors of John
Fraser d Co., entitled to prove for the amount
OF their claims, as set forth In the pleadings
against defendants, Charles T. Lowndes and
james Robb, trustees, under the memorandum
Of agreement made and entered into on the
twenty ftth. day of November, 1867, by Theo-
dore D. Wagner and William l. Trenholm, on
behalf of John Fraser & Co., with their
CREDITOR,
1aat the amount due to the plaintiff, VIII
liam a. Beall, 7 find to be ninety. nine Thousand
SIX hundred and eighty y-three dollars, and the
amount due to the plaintiff, Jeremiah Beali,
and 'seventy-three dollars. These amonnts
are exclusive of interest, which Is to be calco-
lated on each amount from the eighteenth
day Of December, 1867,
And recommend that the defendants, Chas
T. Lowndes and James Robb. transfer and de-
liver. over to the said plaintiffs, In satisfaction
Of the said claims, and the interest due
thereon. the proportionate share of the bonds
of Theodore d. Wagner and william l.. Tren-
holm as we'll those secured BY the mortgage
ct real estate transferred to them,t said trus-
tees, as set forth In the pleadings, as those se.
cured by personal guarantee and endorsement
OF James T. Welsman and George A. -Tren-
holm, to which, as creditors of the said John
Eraser d Co., they, the said William A Beall
and Jeremiah Beall, are of right entitled.
TO this finding, the attorneys for the de-
fence excepted, and consequently the case
Was brought up on Its merits.
Colonel Thomas Y. Simons continued the
argument for the plaintiffs. He held that the
position taken by the defence that the plain
tins were not parties to the deed of asslsR-
ment was fallacIous, because the signatures OIL
the Messrs. Beall were not affixed to the deed
through the refusal of the trustees to recog-
nize them as creditors; and that they were
now asserting their right to do 30. That the
discharge In bankruptcy in England OF Fraser
Trenholm & Co. did not release John Fraser d
Co. in this country, because that discharge
was confined to the former frm That the
evidence In the case established the
tact that In consenting to the discharge
Of Fraser, Trenholm & Co. the Messrs.
Beall had reserved the right to sue John
Fraser d. Co. for the balance Of their
account. That John Fraser & Co. had
made deed of assignment, by which they un-
dertook to pay the deficiencies OF Fraser, Tren-
kolm & Co. That the cotton was shipped
through John Fraser g. Co. In the belief that
they were fully liable therefor, and that It was
20 accepted by them.
the conclusion of Colonel Simons's argu-
ment, which occupied about two hours, Judge
Dunkin followed for the defence" he main.
tanned that when cotton Is shipped through
one house to another house, the liability hZes
upon the house to which the cotton Is shipped.
That the cotton In question had been shipped
by the plaintiffs to Fraser. Trenholm & Co.,
Liverpool, through Jno. Fraser & Co., Charles
ton, the latter firm acted only as asforwarding
agents and received commissions as such, con-
sequently they were not liable for the proceeds
OF that cotton.
The Hon. J. B. Campbell next continued
the argument on the side OF the plaintiffs.
he said there was oHly one real question, the
others being merely side issues; that question
was whether John Fraser & Co. we're liable
tor the proceeds of the said cotton. To prove
this 1t was necessary to reclte the history Of
the firm. They had commenced business in
Charleston nearly three.qusrters OF a century
ago, were reputed to be Of great wealth and
had branch houses in New York and Liver
pool. The one in New York was under the
management Of Mr.. John T. Welsman,
a gentleman who had BEEN admitted
Into the firm in Charleston; the other
In !: Liverpool was under the manage
rlent of MIR. W. L. Trenhhlm, young gen.
tleman who had been educated In the firm.
The house In New York was discontinued at
the beginning of the war; the house in Liver
pool was continued all through the war, and
for several years AFTER, and every business
man knew that they were but different
branches, of the same house. He spoke tor:
more than an hour. making some other points
of minor Importance. This concluded the
arguments of the case, aud the Judge took the
papers, rsservlng his decision.
Return OF A. M. Mackey.
The return ofTrlal Justice A. NJ Msosy to g.
rule to show cause why he shonld not be pro-
hibited from making certain levles upon the
stock of Mrs. C. Stackley, was made yester-
Cay by @. W, Buttz, Esq. 1t sets forth that
the executions were Issued before the defend
ant was served with copy of the rule. The