The New York herald., 1872-12-28
THE STOLEN GOVERNMENT BONDS.

Suit by the Government Against Vcr-
miiyc d Co. and the Adams Express
Company to Determine the Ownership
of $500 Worth OF Government Bonds,
Stolen from the Adams Express Conn
pany and Alleged to Have Been Bought
In Good Faith by vermiiyc & Co.-Im-
portant Decision by Judge Blstchford.
Yesterday, In the United States Circuit Court,
Judge Blatchford rendered decision in the case OF
The United States vs. Washington r. Vermilye Il
Co. and the Adams Express Company. The bill in
this case sets forth that the defendants, vermllye
4 Co., claim to own five OF the obligations OF the
United States known as seven-thirty notes for
$1,000 each issued June l5 1885, and three Of such
notes for 500 each issued on the same date; that
such eight notes were sent by vermilye q Co. to
the p.antifrfor payment or redemption, yermilye 4
Co. claiming that they had purchased these notes in
good faith and for a valuable consideration, with
out notice or suspicion that the seller was not the
owner Of the notes; that the defendants, the
Adams Express Company, likewise claim to be the
owners Of all OF the notes. and that they were
stolen from them about the 22d May 1865 and that
their title to the notes never parted with that
each Of the claimants has notified the plaintiffs not
to pay or deliver the notes to the other; that the
plaintins have been always willing to deliver the
notes and to pay the money secured thereby to the
pcrSoHS ldWlulIy tHtlIlSu 10 receive tHem LnaC
they offer to deliver the same into Court and that
they do not collude with either claimant, and have
not brought this suit at the request OF either or
both, ana have not been indemnihed by either or
both. The prayer OF the. bill is that the
rights 10 the notes and to the money
secured thereby, and that the plaintiffs may
be at liberty to deliver the notes to the Court and
that the defendants may be enjoined from com.
mencng any suit against the plaintiffs touching
the premises, and that the plaintiffs upon the pay
tnon inf nf felIc mn and
the defendants to interplead may be discharged OF
all liability to the de endants in tine premises.
ship OF the notes, and denies that the Adams Ex-
press Company has any interest in or title to them.
by them in the ordinary course OF business at their
banking house in this city; that at the time OF
this purchase they paid fu'l value for the
notes; that they bought them in good faith,
and without any knowledge or notice that the
parties from whom they purchased the notes were
not lawful owners OF them, and in the full belief
that such persons were such owners; that they
forwarded the notes to the Secretary OF the Treas
ury at Washington. for redemption and payment,
other purpose; that 1t was the duty OF the plain
tins to have redeemed and paid the notes to them,
or 10 have returned them to Nermilyc & Co. and
that they demanded return Of them from the
plaintiffs before the commencement of this suit.
The answer asks that the Court Will adjudge that
yermyc h Co. are the owners OF the notes, en-
titled 10 recover and receive them or the amount
due thereon.
Adams Express Company put in an answer de-
nying the ownership OF fermilye X Co., claiming
that they purchased the notes in good faith and
for valuable consideration, without notice or sus-
picon that the seller was not the owner OF the
notes. II sets up an ownership in the company,
and AYERS the character of the company as car
rier and forwarder OF money packages for hire,
and that it Was so in May, 1865 between New Al
bany and Indiana and New York city, On the 10th
bany, Ind, owned one of the $1,000 notes; that on
that day and place the cashier endorsed that note
Of ns ny TrsssSy seryay tor
OF the Treasury for conversion. w. Mann, Cast
This note, placed in an envelope, was addressed to
the Secretary OF the Treasury at Washington and
while II was in possession OF the company as car.
rer 1t was stolen from them and came
into the possession Of some unknown person. The
note subsequently got into circulation, but with an
endorsement bearing traces Of attempted Oblitera-
tion. on this ground the Secretary Of the Treas
ury refused to redeem or convert 1t; the company
paid the bank the amount OF the nOte and claims
to be entitled to It and the amount due upon it.
also received by Adams Express to be forwarded
New York, the notes being the property OF the
they were stolen on the way, and subsequently got
into the possession OF yermiye g. Co., that firm
having purchased them, as they declared, in good
faith anu IN the same manner as the other note.
But the Adams Express Company claim that YER
milye Co, prior to purchasing the notes, received
notice that the notes had been stolen and that Ii
Vermiye & Co. parted with value for the notes
they did so in violation OF the notice from the
upon the notes had been taurpered with The Adams
Express Company paid to the two banks respec
lively the entire value OF the stolen notes. Judge
Blatchford recites the whole history OF the trans
action. 1t is objected, he says, the part OF ver-
myc co. that the express company has no title
to or interest In the notes, other than that which
arises from its having paid the amounts OF the
notes to the banks and that there is evidence OF
any transfer to the company OF the titles OF the
| banks or OF any other person to the notes. The
Judge holds that the facts proved are sufficient to
establish The right OF the Adams Express Company,
| as against vermilye Co., to receive payment OF
the notes from the United States. and to protect
the United States In paying the notes to the CON-
pany. There must be u decree In favor OF the cx-
press company.
CA Seward and c. NJ Da Costa for the express
company.
J. +. Burrill for yermiye 4 Co.