Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1872-10-28
McvEIIff w. UNDERWOOD.
Ways that Dark and Tricks that are
Win:

l he laulollS case OF llc\ clgn vs.. Underwood,
for the recovery Of the plaintiff residence in
this city occupied the whole time Of the Cor
p"ratlun Court on Saturday last. The follow
ing is 4 report Of the proceedings had thereon
Vim. \. McI eigl vs.. John G. Underwood
and Erasmus Force, trustee Of Mrs. j. {. I'm
lcrwood, joined as defendants.
| The plaintiff was represented by John How
ard, esq. an eminent member of the Richmond
bar, Judge Thomas, and G. w. WattIcs, esq.
the defendants by 5. Ferguson Beach, esq.
Mr.. Howard stated that there were some mat
| tiers Of testimony that escaped the attention
of counsel which they would like to introduce
by agreement Of counsel for Defense letter
written By G. w. Wattles esq.,, and the COD
vcyauce to Foree,.as trustee for Mrs. Under
wood, TWO or three days thereafter also de-
sired to offer that there We're some twenty odd
cases OF similar character of contiscation against
| McN egh.
Mr.. Beach called the attention of the court
to the admisSiblty of the dispositions. The
dispositions were taken in other cases their
purpose was to show Il fraudulent combination
at the sal c. The objection made was to that
object. Counsel had now shifted their ground.
Last night he understood counsel to change
their position, and now they claimed that the
fraud was in the judgment.
Mr.. Howard claimed admissibity on both
grounds. The defendants had used the pro-
cess OF the court tor purpose of fraud.
The Court regarded the decree of confsca-
ton entirely cut Of the way; it had been re-
versed
Mr. Howard-It the Judge who makes the
decree coIludes with the officer.
The Court (interrupting) said the Supreme
Court had decided the question. reversing the
judgment.
Mr. Howard argued to show that the report
was fraudulent in reporting a fair sale, which
was fraudulent, and obtaining the confirmation
OF the fraudulent sale
Mr.. Beach Whether these matters 90 to
impeachment Of the judgment is matter for
the jury, rather than the court. There was no
necessity for confirmation of sale in this case
THIS was sale made by the executive officer
of the court under an execution under the
JUDI mcnt This is case where the court is a
vendor. and the confirmation was unnecessary
to the validity of the sale. The officer holds
the property under. the judgment Of the court
and returns the proceeds. This. then, is ex-
traneous. If there is any testimony going to
show fraud IN the Judgments, and duplicating
these parties, then it may be admissible, but
We contend such Is not the case. The Supreme
Court had made suggestion, almost amount
ing TO decision, that if these judgments were
to be npeached it must be by proceedings d.
recty for that purpose. The parties simply
claim the benefit Of the judgments under which
the property was sold. There are equities be-
tween these parties to be adjusted. They are
ready to surrender up this property upon the
payment Of these Judgments The dispositions
were objected to, as they did not bear upon the
questions proposed to be raised. Unless they
are relevant they cannot b. read
Mr.. Howard We don't attack the julg-
m"nts. They are liens. and when We get our
property We will pay the judgments. We call
not pay the judgments until We get the prop
crty. All the title the parties have they get
under the decree. The decree vas made upon
Ii fraudulent report
Mr.. II. continued to argue upon the general
proposition as to the aimlssibility of the tcSi-
mony to show fraud, reading ut length from
the testimony proposed to be offered to the
jury.
At the conclusion Of the reading Of the dep
0sit!one. the Court admitted them 50 far Is to
show fraud in the sale aud confirmation.
Mr.. Beach desired to know if the Court
thought the dispositions competent il these
parties We're not connected with the fraud.
The Court withheld its opinion on that point
as yet.
Mr. Beach contcnled that even though the
plaintiffs show fraud in the decree. yet unless
they connect the defendants the sale of the
sheriff would not be invalid.
: The counsel on both sides announced that
they had closed their testimony.
Mr.. Leach then suggested that the testimony
did not show that the defendants ware con-
nected with the fraud. and contendel that it
should be excluded
Judge Thomas wanted counscs proposition
reduced to writing
Mr.. Beach continued, DRAWN. illustrations
from analogous cases. to show that the defend
ants must be committed in the fraud in order to
invalidate the defendants tide; and Mr. B.
argued that there Vas nothing 10 these depo.
sltlons to effect the legal tendency Of such a
proposition as was cOntcnded for.
Judge Thomas did not understand the posi-
ton assumed by counsel, aud he asked that it
be reduced to writing. Testimony had already
been Admitted asto certain purposes. Now came
special objections. \ new Credit Mobillier;
conspiracy has been formed in this case, and
the declarations of the conspiratorS should be
held admissible. What was said by Alley, who
was the leader of the ring, should be admissi
BILE, because those declarations are followed by
proof of what did occur. These parties all had
! lull huoSiCuSC VI HlIdl mdS plUpOSCu W Ut
done. He thought the dispositions ought to be
admitted.
Mr.. Howard argued that purchaser to be
protected By the rule of non-notice must be pur-
chaser for valuable consideration. There is not
title of evidence that Mrs Underwood ever
had dollar of separate estate. The consider
alton moved from Judge Underwood, and the
conveyance was made to his wife. Judge L.
is connected by the testimony as one of the
parties to this conspiracy, and knew of the
fraud. He had by the use of his wife's name
endeavored to protect himself from the effects
of damuing fraud, and this conveyance was
made after Mr.. Wattles, out of professional
courtesy, had written him note advising him
that he was about to proceed with this suit
Mr.. Howard continued to argue, quoting from
Kerr on fraud.
Mr.. Beach replied 10 the argument of coun.
sci reafhrming his proposition.