, 1873-05-18
ASSIGNEE VS.. RECEIVER.
Tie Late Commercial Insurance Com.
- pany's Real Estate.
Assignee Jenkins Flies Bill Concerning lis
Sale. -; :


OF which the following ia . condensation CON-
plainant AYERS that on the 9th OF DeoeinDet'
1872, the Company was adjudicated banhIup1,
and that On the, 22d Of March, 1873, eompla1nhn'
WIS appointed Assignee OF the estate; that a1ter-
wards, on the same day, Register Hiooaro eAe
cuted and delivered to complainant an @7slen
1nent of ali The Company's effects; that Oh UeI'
O 1871 tba Company had policies outstanding
a,ronntine to ebout s12, 100000; that by the
,-o,t tra Of that date the liability OF the Com
nanv vns about 81, 100000 and such U.s.
hi1itv became an actual and fixed indebted
nesa. that ut the time OF tho ire
Tim Compauys assets were S2oo,oooi
that in fact. the great fire rendered the Company
hopelesaly insolvent that the Company, IN COM
n1iance with its charter, held real estate, among
Is thu east 10 feet Of Lot s, Block IS, Original
Town Of Chicago, worth, without Improvements
$40. 600: that on the 14th OF December, 1911,
there yas fled for record, in the heco1uerS
Office of Cook County, trust deed pufpo1'.ns
10 have been executed Aug. Il, 1oio' oy tne
oo1nn,nv. and running to H- ". Blooge11 -
T1nstac. sna Clark ". Upton as successor Ii
trnst. that eaid deed purports to be q convey"
ance in trust to secure the payment o. a tne G9n
nanvg bonds to the amount OF Soo,UoO. uslueu
into Gums of 900 each Pagaole & N ,en - ssa aid
Connany. the said trust deed empowering tne
TTrstoe to sell the land on default o. the Pay;;
1nent OF one more bonds on glv,ng haAty IA
notice of the time and place OF sucn sac, a1 ~
ine1 baen neaotiated By said Company that neither
Honrv W. BIodgett nor Clark ". Upton kneU
of s11ch trust decd until long a1ser tne tn5oaseu
cT Of the Company; that it never vas oenseteo
them that icy neyer sse las ever BEEN and
IL wholly imperative, as security ior a1.:
amount; that all said bonds were de4Verea ~ eus
time Of the filing OF tho trust deed to the flfs-
National Baak aah+a9nsas o. osag dae the @ bs5f By
the Company; but said bank claims thas
the bonds were delivered in the latter part OF
f1ctober. 1871, after said Company became II;
solvent, and were to indemnify the bank asatnst 81
advances before that time to the Company, & TO
tha amount Of about S19, GOO; that some OF them
sra secured upon said premises by the trust
deed. for the reason aforeaaid; that On Feb u,
1872. the firm OF Whitney, Taylor d 20. e5nlo.
tied their bill in the Cook County supreme Gon1t
s9ainat he Company, Henry ". Blodgett, Clark
= linton. and Taricns stockholders; that SAID
hill covered the interests of all others situated
like complainant; that they bought the plu as
ain:i contract creditors that .ney hehed ou NJ
lien upon the real estate; that tue 1q.1;:t mater
WA urosecuted for the complainants By William
G. Cloudy and George Chandler, solicitors that
on April l. 1872, portion OF the oorred
On Feb: IS. 1872, On the Company, through
W;1ia1n 81. Kav. its President that although
Kay knew OF the insolvency OF the company
and OF the unteuable grounds upon winch COM
plainants lay claim 70 1eai e9sase ne ;tont
aEy argument Of the demurrer, said bill vas, May
so 1872, dismissed as to all Of the stocknolaers,
except the Company and Henry W blooeett,
end that at The same rms me es;d aeip RIndestt s
aud reference was had to the Master that
Eaid Blodgett had no interest in tho proceedmgs'
aud did not recognize or assent to the tlost ~
tempted to be imposed upon nm; 1nAa na 'oa5 oa;d
etockholders and officers Of the Company dls-
missed, colluded together, and that SAID STOCK.
holders and officers, to escape acconnnng ~;
their wrongful conversion o. me asae.s' da
fense. considering that the bill should be Gus
missed: that herenpon claims we're proved +,
The amount OF $81, ,9f990; that Joseph E. smltl
was appointed D. hecelset and apbiset M boWever t.
fsau Bonds negotiable, sold, or disposed Of b:
eaid Company under the deed OF trnst
that any Of the complainants, or their solicitors
1,inht purchase, but that said decree did not INT
tue amount Of the said incumbrance, go shat 1n'
premises might be sold at their reasonable Fa:ue
that said Goudy and Chandler knew the amount M q
we're given to secure, and could establish tht
rnounf OF said lien, but that, intending to pur
chasc the premises, purposely Kept ont o. sa.t ![
Recree the amount OF the lndeoteoness I:
bidders; that the Receiver aave1tsss Eaa,st
"a the Ne.cs, which had q mis-
erable circulation; that the sale was made Jul!
s, 1872, nominally to one Sidney Myers, 10
e17,2;o; that in October, 1872 Myers. BY
trc.lal warranty deed, conveyed the premises =
William O. Goudy, warranting said title on y
against his own acts; that Cloudy conveyed tn
undivided quarter to George Chandler by dee'
rnreccrded, as orator believes; tnat me sale ~
Tor the benefit of Goudy and Chandler; tha
afterwards certain parties, intending to declar
the Company bahkrpt'4 fled PET Pehtioaay r..
1Stssa ha hat oash ssi Geady Gss9n' snS S'5' chsas
Ter. who paid petitioners. vaiuabl
consideration; fha. such acts Of Goudy an
Chandler ct al. are fraud upon the BankEup
law; that the order Of the Court diamlss1n
should be set aside on account Of the fraud be
fore set out; that the deed Of Myers should
removed rs cloud upon the title Of compladnaI
ss Assignee and that the deed to Goudy and th
deed to Chandler should be declared null an
void that tho amount expended by cloudy an
Chandler about the real estate, including .th
pretended purchase OF the bonds, does not e1cee
the sum Of $50, 900, about half the value Of th
ground, s7o,oOo; that on Oct !, 1874 Goud
end vito delivered to Benjamin =. Gallup dee
of trust conveying said real estate to secure tn
payment Of six bonds for $4,000 each TINT Ga
Inn at the time also knew Of the fraud; that
the Circuit Court Gallup filed petition :. ef
tablRh title, intending to cut of the rights {
complainant that this court should be enjolne
from proceeding against complainant, it not la!
ing Jurisdiction: that the Receiver has pal
over to Goudy and Chandler s16, 7s0, WHICH shoul o.
he paid ovor. to complainant, and that the
may be compelled to do 80; that the Cou1
bonds to the First National Bank in fraud ct th
Bankrupt act and that the said sale may be ca1