The New York herald., 1875-10-20
DUNCAN. SHERMAN & 90.


There a somewhat lengthy argument in Supreme
Court Chambers, before Judge lawrence the order
70 chow why the order Of against Duncan
Sherman Co. should not be vacated On the 21st OF
July last Roebling Bros bought at Duncan Sherman
Co bill OF exchange payable at the Union Bank Of
London. Six days later as is well known Duncan Sher-
Co suspended payment the result being that when
she bill OF exchange in question, by due Of mail
presented at the bank for payment to pro-
test Upon allegation Of fraud against Duncan,
Sherman Co. the specific allegation being that they
knew they were insolvent when they sold tho bill OF
exchange orders OF were issued against each
member OF the firm. After considerable preliminary
diminishing in the courts with view to have this
order vacated the finally argued yesterday on
its merits, Mr.. Henry H. Morange appearing for the
plaintiffs and Mr.. mcfarland representing Duncan,
Sherman h Co.
Mr. Morange who opened the argument, read series
of adavits charging that the defendants did keep
books which showed their losses; that they fraudu-
enty concealed the transfer OF their real estate made
in S6S and 1874 lest the public would understand their
true conditions that they knew since 1865 that they
were hopcessy nsolvent and still went on receiving
deposits and that when they sold 10 plaintiffs
1he bill of exchange they had funds here;
that their schedule showed that they owed the Union
Bank at the time $139 COO and at all events even II
they bad S3o 600 in the bank previously they had
when the bin was presented for payment Having
finished the reading Of his papers, he insisted that the
defendants had no right TO sell this bull OF exchange
knowing that they were insovent at the time He
can. Sherman Co. were OF no account IN the matter
compared with the vndicaon of the law that their
credit vas rerevaby gone that they stood before the
country dshonored men that eloquence of counsel
Of his aristocratc gloyed hand could make IL
otherwise and that they should be dealt with the
lii reply Mr. Macfarland stated that Duncan Sherman
Co bad been doing banking business IN this city for
the last twenty-five years panic came aud their as
sets suffered IN bulk IN with that of others
During the past five months there had been fearful
shrnkage ia values AT the time this bill Of exchange
.GgfA fha Oh nF NN,vVL
bright and there symptoms Of an approaching
storm. In the discharge of conscientious duty
resolved TO make an examination into their affairs
Public confidence ~ the integrity and stability Of the
firm was unbounded II was deemed too perious 10
subject 10 losses money ntrusted 70 their hands At
moment when they could have obtained any sum IN
the street they wanted conscientious duty
directed the bank TO be closed, and il
closed There we're words Of sympathy for them
on every hand-not word Of reproach but regrets
This proceeding he characterized extraordinary
and II might be designated BY harsher language The
bill OF exchange was sold IN the usual way and thore
funds then TO meet IT, Abiding the deciding Of
real estate he described family reasons as the motive
for adopting the taken. In conclusion be dis.
cussed the law applicable TO the case Insisting that
cordng to the code actual fraud must be substanated
10 sustain order OF arrest He claimed that the
argument on the other side made up Of loose
general, wild and vague allegations, and the matter
set forth in the afdavIts was chaotic mass Of incom
AT the close OF the argument the Court took the
papers, reservIng its decision.
Ever since Ira shafer made his matchmaking
speech in the Superior Court Chambers before Judge
Lawrence against Judges DAVIS and Daniels, Of the
Supreme Court, General Term, it has been expected
that although passing the speech In silence at the
time Judge Lawrence would take cognizancc Of il in
some shape In fac the majority Of lawyers frequent
ing tie Courts have been seduously watching both 10
the Chambers and in the General Term expecting that
tue rate assaant would be brought before one the
other oi the Courts order TO show why he
should not be punished for contempt; In which
case rich scene anticipated Al length
Judge Lawrence has taken tho Initiative He
did this yesterday in giving his decision on tho
motion growing out OF the argument in witch the or
fensivc words we're uttered This notion a. viii be
remembered, was amply for payment to counsel OF
fees from funds IN tho hands Of the receiver apponed
an the suit Of Hetheron Hastings who az partners
took the contract for tho plumbing work in the nov
Post Odce, but which through ndcrstaudine
ended 10 their getting IN lawsuit in quite az elab
Orate opinion Judge Lawrence gives his reason for de
nying the motion, which, however II a matter of M
special public interest The matter of real ptnres s
fhc closing paragraph, In which reference s made IA
Mr. Sbaier's remarks This portion of tie opinion Il
as foows and viii be seen, is short, sharp and de-
cdedly suggestive :-"In opposing this motion Ian
guage used by the counsel for the defendant of
friob character TO render my duty report the
came 10 a General Term Of this Court In order that
such action may be taken thereon under the
stances may seem appropriate"