New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-04-17
COURT RECORD.
WEDNESDAY, APRIL l6, 1875.
United STATES Circuit Court-Befors K.
III. Dureli, District Judge.

Ant. Gonzales vs. Louisiana State Lot
terry Company .-Dismissed on motion 81
complainant.
United states COMMISSIONER. Court.
United States Commissioner Il. Ill. Shan"
non rendered the following decision III the
case Of the United States Ts. Emanuel
Dreyfus and Aarcus Wiel:
The above named parties were charged
with having, within the period OF three
months next preceding the day on which
proceedings in bankruptcy were com menced
against the firm of h. Dreyfus u Co, OF
which firm the said parties were menu ers,
sold, disposed of and conveyed, nor oy
bona fide transac toGs in the Ordinary course
of their business, large amount OF goods.
wares and chattels which were obtained
upon credit and unpaid for; also, that on
or about the twenty eighth of December,
1872, the said parties being bankrupt and
insolyent did dispose of about the sum OF
$500 worth of their personal property with
a view of detrauding their creditors, con-
trary to the act of Congress n sdcA cases
made and provided.
The charge was made under the 1ortE'
fourth section of the act of Congress known
as the bankrupt act The eylIence shows
that during the months OF November and
December, 1872, shortly after the purchase
by the firm OF f. Dreyfns & Go. OF large
bills OF merchandise in New tork. PhHa-
delphia and St. LOuis, this firm, dong
business as merchants at Monroe. IN she
State of Louisiana, sold and disposed OF
large quantities OF those goods while IN
transitu from the place OF shipment TO their
place of business. among other parties TO
Messrs. Nj. Il n. FibelmaD, of the town of
Delta. Louisiana. The amount OF these
transactions, according TO Moses EIbet-
mans testimony, was between s1Opu anu
80 900. and according to Nathan friedman
between $4,000 and $4,000. The goods
thus purchased we're not retailed in the
ordinary course of mercantile transactions
at a town or country store, but were boxed
mp and shipped off to various points on toe
Mississippi river with the evident intent of
making fraudulent disposition or conceal
ment of them from the creditors OF the firm
OF +. Dreyfus 4 Co.
1t also appears from the evidence in the
record that this Arm during the period al
ready stated shipped and sent to New Or
leans large quantity of flour and whisky,
which vas placed on the market there. dis
posed of with the like object and intent
that characterized the disposition of the
other goods of this firm ! to the Eibelmans.
The evidence of Mr.. Lambeth especially
shows the fraudulent acts of these two par
ties. Dreyfus Il Wiel, by the admissions
male by them to him, which proves this 10 be
one of the worst and fragrant cases of bank
ruptcv that have ever known To be de-
ye.oped in any court.
The goods which were thus traudnicntly
DISPOSED of BY these men had been bought
of merchants in New York. Philadelphia
and St. Louis upon credit and without any
apparent cause tor such disposition ol the
property thus purchased, was made away
with before it had reached their place OF
business. Ii is also proven that within an
incredibly short space of time this young
and enterprisng e. firm had incurred ila-
bilities to the very large sum OF SlbS,OO,
with alleged assets Of between S0,OOO and
soc 900: that during thu months of Noven-
Der aud December 1872. they had sold
goods to the amount Of between 100000
and $50, 900 for cash, the whole OF which
they said had been spent-t spent at all
IN st proba bly, it was in TiOtOus living, and
utterly refused to make any exhibit or
abatement of their affairs to their creditors.
Nearly all the acts which these parties have
done respecting the sale and disposition Of
these goods thus purchased from the mer'
chants of New York, Philadelphia and 81.
Louis, and more especially from the
firm of Peake. Opdyke i Co.. OF
the city of New York we're fraudulent
and in violation cf the torty-foarth section
of the act entitled ian act 10 establish
uniform system of bankruptcy throughout
the United States, approved March :, 1867.
and as there is probable cause ~ believe
Emanuel Dreyfus and Marcus Niel guilty
of the Ctfense therein specified. shall so
decide.
The case of the United STATES vs.. Ruser.
!; Am. Law Times, III, is the only author
itv which deem necessary 70 cite as eStah-
fishing the law of this case in favor of the
government ant against the defendants
The parties charged i'll this case will be
held to answer Tor the oft. asas alleged
4
find security for their appearance before
the United States District Court in the
sum OF $4,000 each. or IN default sheyeo!
10 stand committed.
superior District Court.
State of l. ,uisiana ex rel. Mrs. James
Ryback w. recorder of mort @agrs. -Sian.
danus granted. The defendant ordered 10
abstain from mentioning against the rc!at"f
or her property the inscription uG II certain
Judgment rendered by the late Seventh Dis
trict Court in faycr Of Morrison. Hartman
& Co.
State Of Louisiana ~. Edward DOoth.--
On motion of counsel for plaintiff, and on
suggesting to the court That defendant has
violated the injunction issued in this case
and served upon him, by pursuing his busI.
ness described iI the petition since the SER
vice of the writ of injunction upon hun,
it is ordered that the said Edward Booth.
defendant. show cause on Friday. the
eighteenth day Of April. 1873. at II A. NJ.
Why the sheriff should not be ordered to
close up the establishment Of defendant
aforesaid. in enforcement of the writ OF i'd
junction 50 issued :.uG served upon defend.
ant, and why said defendant, Edward
Booth. should not he puniShed for contempt
OF the orders of th!s court b. tine and :m.
prsonment.
Teutouia Nationa! Bank ~ Southern
Bank-Suit for 5000. the difference be.
tween certain checks thrown out bv the
Clearing House. The ease turned on the
point whether the demand .. payment of d
check was made before or after eleven
o'clock. The testimony tor the defendant
bank being more positive than that of the
plaintiff, and both parties beng equally IN
tarested in proving the time. .he court de-
cided and gave Judgment for the dett ndant.
William Weiss Va. City of New Orleans. -
Plaintiffs petition alleges that on the night
of the fifth of Mach. 1873. mob or large
crowd of awltss and Iiotous persons broke
open and entered his dwelling house and
store. No. !58 Chartres street. and carried
off and destroyed property July value! -.
SlS7. 30
Among the articles enumerated as carried
away are one air gun. Se|euty-ulp. other
guns. 70! pistols. powdr! TASKS. ammun!-
zion. etc. twenty bowie knives. two swords.
three game bags. etc BESIDES. uo: forget
ting $3.50 cash money. two breastpins.
chain. tw" gold watches and a pair OF
bracelets were taken 10 aid in capturing
the third precinct stationhouse.
second District Court.
SUGGESTIONS of Caroline Palmer. wife NJ
=. :. Kendall, and Eugene Hacker opened.
Fourth District Court.
Charles c. Edey vs.. John Fl. Mckee et
ai--In June. 1863. this defendant and ).
=. Griffin aud two others were in pdrtnes