The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-11-06
Sharp and Decisive Ruling on Forfeited
Recognzances.
THE TRIAL OF COLONEL DIES ANGEs.

On the calendar OF the Special Term OF the Supreme
court for the present term is OF much public
Importance, involving tho disposition made of the
property OF the New Jersey Steam Navigation Com
pany. The suit is brought by one of the numerous
creditors OF the soldout company to enforce claim OF
nearly $4,000 against "Unce Daniel" Drew, tho
former President of the company and several OF the
directors. During the existence or the company the
late Russell Sturgis earned from II in the form Of
financial commissions over $4,000 for which he
brought suit and recovered Judgment but on
Issuing execution 1t was found that all the
property of the company had been sold by Daniel Drew
and his associates and the proceeds appropriated
their He then brought the present suit TO en-
force his claim against Mr. Drew and his directors
claiming that If the property Of the company had
boon appropriated by them it would have been sum
Gent to pay not only his III other claims against
the COMPANY The suit is entitled Appleton Sturgis as
administrator OF the goods chattes and credits OF Rus
sell Sturgis deceased against Daniel Drew Jacob H.
Vanderbilt, John Engls and Henry B. Norton on the
being called by Judge Lawrence 1t was found
not to be quite ready for trial because of the illness of
main Witness and specially set down for trial on
Monday next. Involving, 1t does, not only large
amount Of claims against the company, but also
much larger amount Of property OF the company
claimed to have been unawfully appropriated by
'Uncle Dancl' and of the directors its result is
looked forward to with proportonae interest. Quite
array OF counsel are engaged in the case Messrs.
Butler, Stllnan and Hubbard representing plaintiff,
and ex.Judgo Davies, Mr. Work, Charles Jones and
Others the defendants
The complaint in the case charges that in November,
1865 Russell Sturgis commenced action in the Su-
perior Court, in this city, against the New Jersey
Steam Navigation Company, to enforce claim which
accrued to him against the company in the year 1862
The company appeared in the action and put in
answer sworn to by Daniel Drew. On The 18th or
April 1871 Judgment was recovered against the com
.Da
taken, and while the appeal pending the plain
tin Russell sturgis, died, and Appleton sturgis,
suit, was substituted In his stead. In
February, 1873, tho judgment was affirmed, but
execution being issued thereon it was returned unsas
fed and so remains This company is charged to have
been corporation organized uSder an ACT o. The Legs
ature Of the State OF New Jersey passed February 28
1885, providing among other things, that the capital
stock should be $500 000 and might be increased to
$1,000 600 If necessary that the stock should be d.
vded into shares of 800 each and that all tie affairs
OF the company should be managed by one OF their
number, TO be President thereof that the company
was organized with Daniel Drew as President and tho
operated lines of steamers plying on the Hud-
son River and Long Island Sound; that at the time
80 claim of Mr. Sturgs accrued the company
solvent. and owned assets greatly in OF all
It's debts and liabilities 7,eh should have been applied
to the payment OF the judgment in favor Sturgis
and other claims OF various creditors Of the company
but that the said company did not did its pres-
dent and directors any of them, properly qudate
the affairs OF said company apply its property to the
payment OF its debts; that plaintiff is Informed and
believes, after the claim of Mr. Sturgis accrued and
some time before the Judgment in his favor OBJ
tanned the Defendants as officers OF the company sold
oil Its property and assets and converted the into
money, which they divided among themselves and
certain other stockholders of the company in proper
ton to the stock held at the time OF such division by
the several parties who received the same and thereby
diverted all the corporate property OF the company to
the private of themselves and certain other stock
holders TO the plaintiff unknown, that the same
could not be reached by execution issued upon the
judgment of Mr. Sturgs; that when such division of
Daniel Drew Is believed to have held 2 ago shares of
the stock OF the company, the par value OF 500
each Jacob II. Vanderbilt, 500 shares; John Englis
153 shares and Henry b Norton lis shares; that the
property sold was worth twice the par value Of tho
companys Stock and by the sale thereof the defend
ant Daniel Drew received and applied to his
about $49S 900, the defendant Vanderbilt about
S160, 600 Englis about $780, 900 and Norton about
So, 000 II is further charged the part of plaintiff
that all such proceeds received by defendants were
equity liable to be and should have been applied to
the payment OF Sturgis Judgment and that the same
lave been applied by said defendants and wrohgfuly
converted TO their use In violation of the rights of
the creditors or the company and OF plaintiff that de-
PENDANTS, by their acts have conveyed covered and
concealed all the property Of the said company and
have appropriated the same to the use of themselves
and other stockholders Of tho company, and have re-
moved tho same beyond the reach OF the plaintiffs
Judgment and the execution issued thereon The
complainant concludes by asking that the defendants
be adudged to be jointly and severally liable for and
adudged to pay the judgment in favor Of Russell Sur
Sis and to account for the property the New Jersey
steam Navigation Company received, appropriated and
converted by Them and that plaintiff may have such
further relief to the Court shall just and costs
OF his action.
Mr.. Drew makes answer to tho complaint, in which
he admits tho organization and operation OF the
pany; that he and his associates in the suits were OIL
eors OF the company, as charged in tho complaint and
that judgment for the amount claimed had been recov
cred against the company As to the perfectng Of the
Judgment and disposition OF the companys property
az charged in the complaint, he answers that he is
without knowledge information sufficient to form q
belief as TO whether the Judgment was duly entered,
or that an execution issued thereon against the property
OF tho company was returned unsatsfed, or
that such judgment remainsunpad and he, therefore,
ucnes those nllegatons he asserts that all OF the
money, property earnings of the company, which
came into the hands OF the defendants, came in pur
suauce of dividends and resolutions duly made and de-
cared by the Board Of Directors of the company such
dividends having been declared after all the ascertansd
and liquidated claims against the company had been
paid and that no dividends have been made paid by
tho company since the commencement against II OF the
action referred to in the complaint, and that the
tme such dividends were made tho plaintiff had no
legal or equitable lien on the property OF
the company; that tho persons to whom all the prop
erty or the company that has been divided since 1862
divided by direction Of the Board of Directors were
aud owned stock as foows:-Daniel Drew, 2 494
shares; Jacob IL Vanderbilt 800 shares; John Englis
1853 shares; Solomon b. Stone, Ill shares; Henry b.
Norton lis shares; William T. Norton, 30 shares;
David Hayward 1874 shares I. ?. Norton, 200 shares;
H. f. Lockwood, 100 shares; Alfred Lockwood, 300
shares: joel Stone 10 shares d. Smith, 80 shares;
4. Slater go shares; w. j. Travis, 10 shares;
J. l. smallwood, 80 shares l. Black
stone 100 shares; J. Backus, 80 shares, and s.
that tho property was divided among them in proper
to the shares OF STOCK
sone OF whom reside in this State and all Of whom,
he claims should parties 10 this action that there
in existence a largo number Of judgments ana
claims against the company which remain unpaid and
some of them unliquidaed and as no Is informed and
believes at the time Of the entry OF Sturg Judgment
there was not sufficient property Of The company nor
IS there now to pay all the judgments against u inc
answer concludes by claim that the company against
which Sturgis had recovered his Judgment y neces
eary party the action and not being Joined therein,
therc is a defect Of parties
Mr. Engls putsin an answer suostantaly ~, s.n as
10 that OF Mr. Drew and Mr.. Vanderbilt, on his own
behalf pleads the additional statements that during
the year 1863 he admits portion OF the company
property sold and divided among the stockholders
In proportion to their stock in pursuance Of resolu-
lions Of tho Board OF Drectors that up 10 March, 1902
the company had property sufficient pay all its debts
and that during the previous September he sold
TO John Englis all his interest In said stock
and company, and thereafter acted as us
officer, or received any OF tho proceeds OF It's
property. lie admits that in March, 1868, Dapel Drew,
John Engls and Henry Il. Norton, with Solomon b.
Stone, now deceased sold all the remaining property
of the company and divided the proceeds among them
na tha al hold In