The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1875-12-26
PRICE THREE CENTS.
SUITS AGAINST JAY GOULD.
4 sETTLEWEN CdLLED FOR BLACK
FRIDAYS COT 8INdTIONS.
The WHY Broker screening Himself Dchind
the usnry and Gambling Laws Weeping
Tommy 10 Appear for the Great Sburk.

The WHY Broker screening Himself Brhiad
the usnry md Gambling Laws-WeepipE
Tommy 90 Appear for the Great Shurk.
Jay Gould. Henry n. Smith, Horny II
Martin, and John u. Bach are defendants In two
actions growing odt OF the Blncl, F,ljay ocmbi-
nations. that have been brought in tho United
states Circuit Court by Edwin VI. Lewis. trustee
in bankruptcy Of tho estate Of Jay Cooke co.
The declaration In the first action sets forth that
in september, 1859, tho defendants and James
Fisk, Jr., formed pol to alvanco the price
Of gold, nnd employed William Bcldcu & Co. to
buy up large quantities Of gold for them. and
lend 1t out ~ collateral Tor advances of cur
rercv. "hey dcpusiicd s9o0f0 IN 9 III with Jay
Cooke Il Co, and oh ined an advance ON the
strength Of tint ~ Si&,i!W g. .r,en'y. vf THIS
Jaw Cooke 4 Co., fnrrlYllr Offered to surrender tho
gold coli t,rnl ith interest In OctoOcr ls1, the
sccounts between Jay Cooke y Co. aud tho de-
PENDANTS wrr' stated. and a II laurc Of S1lhiO.i5
was found ~ b, due to the former and the d "
PENDANTS promised to pay IT, but h We failed to
The declaration IN the secoad suiL-scs forth
that on SeUt -. ist1. Jav Cooke y Go asTeed 10
deliver the following day to Alnorii-peyer ON 40
count OF the defcndnnts (" $500 ia god, tho do
therefor s:SJ,0O currency. At the appointed
timo they maIc a tender Of th"g"ld, but neither
the defendants, Flax, nor S3cNer would pay
the agreed price ioI II from which Jay Cooke
Go. suffered sl0O0r0 mage.
Sherman tlbruthcr IhOa. Ia Sfrring ap-
pear for Jay Gould and the other dcfcudants.
To the frst suit they interp Ise ns Gesv"'S.
first that the loan Of the $l,sS1,O0 was made ~
usurioua rate OF Interest, the defendant,
ngreeing to pay for fl0lW0 l-l6th per cont. per
day, gold, and Tor the rest }. per cent. per day;
and that tho contract T. therefore, void.
Several other defsnccs ful w. setting forth
th,t sO3,0OO has been paid TO Jay Cooke co. on
account that the gold collateral 4 t90OOOO was
sold by Jay Cooke x Co. for ~ 10000, and the
proceeds applied to the account Of the d fen0-
ants and that In consideration Of the payments
made to Jay Cooke 4 Co., the latter had agreed
to an accord and satisfaction OF tn IT claims
az inst the defendants.
The answer to the second action sets forth.
first. that the contract TO deliver gold to the de
PENDANTS did not cont empate its actual delivery.
but was In the nature of wager as to what the
market price OF gold would be at the time
named that IL was n gambling transaction.
and au evasion OF the gambling law of this State
and in violation thereof
As a further defence. the answer alleges that
for pecunary consideration ia, Cooke Co.
agreed to accord and satisfaction OF their
claim.
Rcplications denying anv evasion of the
or accord and satisfaction were stricken out by
the Court as not required In the Federal courts
In the state of New York, and improper because
not IN accord with the practice uf the stats
courts under the code, this decision establishing
an important precedent
Another suit, arising from the Black Friday
business, In the sane court. against jay Gould
and the s1me GO defendants, has been brought
by John A. Mcfherson, rs the represent tive OF
l. Iac q. Davis co. The derlar ttiOn s"ts forth
hu agreement to deliver Sl+jOu In gold to tho
dcfcndant-, and failure to accept and pay for
II. to the plaintiffs amRge S.O.tOO. Sheai m an
& Sterling ppear also In this suit. ana again ia
terpOse the gambling law IS n defence.