New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-04-29
LOCAL MISCELLANY.
ANOTHER SUIT AGAINST JAYNE.

ANOTHER SUIT AGAINST JAYNE.
LIE is CHARGED WITH DEFRAUDING HIS LATE AS
sAILANT, JOHN p. ATKINsoN-orHER SUITS IN
CONTEMPLATION.
Ex-Special Agent B. G. Jayne reappeared in
New.York on Monday to make answer In the suit OF
William Crutchlcy the nformer of record in the Ct
Woodruff Robinson, and the occasion was taken adj
vantage of to additional papers in another suit
upon him. This suit is begun by John T. Atkinson the
actual nformer in the Story and Weld cases, whom
jayne is alleged have deirauded OF his share OF the
blood money" wrung from these merchants.
The document printed below was served yesterday
on Jayne much 10 his annoyance. 1t is asserted
that the evidence in the will bring TO light written
contract between Jayne and Atkinson TO manufacture
another case against Rufus Story Co., which failed
because Of tho exposure OF the fact that part OF the
money paid by Story TO the Government to settle his
case and return his checks, stolen in transitu 1t
will also develop the fact that part Of Storys papers
were retained in order to manufacture another case
against Boston house. Part OF tho papers Of Messrs
Wylie Knevals Co. were also retained by Jayne after
the settlement with them and he sought 10 make another
case compromise against them but they resisted and
TO begin suit against Jayne for abstraction of
the papers mentioned. The following is the complaint
referred to:
Supreme Court Oity aud County Of Neic-York. John
p Atkinson plaintiff, agt Benian g. Jayne, defendant.
The plaintiff, by his attorneys, stanley Brown &
Clarke complaining the defendant alleges that or
ber ISL tho plaintiff entered into an cement with
the defendant by which the plaintiff was TO furnish TO
the firm OF Rufus Story Co. had committed frauds on
the revenue of the United States in re-
said firm, upon which information said
defendant was TO cause proceedings to be taken
to collect aud receive the share allowed by law to
informers and OF the received was to pay over
the defendants own That thereafter said defend
such proceedings TO be taken that certain OF
Tho hook nd of az
That plaintiff then Informed said defendant wherein
said books and papers would indicate like frauds on the
revenue have beeo committed by tho firm OF W. f.
Weld Go. OF Boston, the defendant thereupon
undertaking and promising said defendant that
tine ons he 5 shOT receye from fines or ponaes
recovered OF said W. +. Weld & Co. That subsequently
States against said Story Co, which were aiterwara
settled by the payment by said Story Co. or inc SUN OF
fourth part OF SAID sum- amounting 10 aoou slsop. was
awarded aud paid TO SAID defendant, entitled thereto
the person giving Information when had leI 10 tue
recovery OF said tine and penalty OF fScOv1 Inat ID
stead OF paying to plaintiff the onehaf part thereof as
heretofore agreed said defendant propoeed to pan 10
pay hun one-tnrd thereof anu as an, Al d,s
for plaintiff accept SAID sum- stated that prOceeunRs
had been or would soon be commenced ~ Boston aass
said w. F. Weld Co.. ana pioposed pidlutn mnIt NUN
accept one-third instead OF haf OF sara SUN 9 hDou
$40 900 the plaintiff should receive onehird or all sums
which might be received by said defendant out OF the
nformers share OF fines or penalties wnlen might %
sSfi pSS 81 sa of endsn pa0 Accepted
instead onehalf OF said sum that thereailerwar9
n nss which against haa NSfn F. Were Vera CO..
money by said f. Weld Co., by way of ne and pen
atty and OF said sum 50 paid large SUMO W.T.
share OF which share defendant large portion
to wit, plaintiff is informed and believes ABOUT the
plaintiff any portion thereof. except the sum oil si0'
although often requested , =,
fendant the OF sOoo) with interest from ly
l, 1873, with costs.