The New Orleans Democrat. (New Orleans, La.) 1875-1876, 1876-02-09
Duncan. sherman 4 Go.

Another motion to vacate the order Of
arrest against Duncan, Sherman ~ Go.
was argued Yesterday before Judge Bar
rett, in Supreme Court Chambers, in the
suit OF Washington A. Roebling and
others against the company. An order
Of arrest was originally granted by
Judge Lawrence in this action against
tho defendants. They were arrested
on the 9Th of October last and gave bail.
The defendants then moved on the 18th
Of October last, before the same judge,
on voluminous papers, to vacate such
order.
After argument and submission,
Judge Lawrence in December last denied
the defendants motion, with costs, thus
maintaining the order Of unrest and
delivering an elaborate opinion. After
the order had been entered denying the
motion us related, defendants moved for
leave to renew, which was granted. In
the meantime judgment had been
entered. The defendants served new
affidavts. and. upon the motion coming
on last week, Mr.. Henry H.. Morange,
counsel forplaintiffs, raised tho prelimi-
nary objections that the motion could
not be made after entry OF judgment
Where the arrest had been made twenty
days before judgment.
The Court held that the point was well
taken, but opened the judgment so as to
enable the motion to be heard, and the
the motion was accordingly yesterday
argued on its merits. Mr.. Larocque,
cousel for defendants, read affidavits to
the effect that the banking house had
never belonged to the firm as ut present
constituted, but to the former firm Of
Duncan, Sherman IL Co., and that VIM.
b. Duncan owned but q one-third inter
est therein that the deeds to Alexander
Duncan In 1868 were made In good faith,
and that the defendants cannot be held
responsible for the failure not to record ;
that the defendants had larf9 deposits
i'm the Union Bank OF London ut the time
they sold the exchange to plaintiffs, and
that II the bank did not pay the draft it
was not their fault.
Mr., Morange, on the plaintiffs behalf,
read af1idavits showing that In January,
befol the Commissioners OF Taxes that
the property Nos. 9and II Nassau street
was his own, and claimed q deduction Of
100000, which was accorded him that
the deed Of the Lyceum had been exc
cuted in blank, and Alexander Duncan g
name inserted just before the record, in
July, 1876, and the same allegations
were made in reference to the assign
ment Of certain mortgages that the de-
PENDANTS failed TO produce any corrob-
Grating affidavits, papers or letters
from the Union Bank OF London,
although three months had elapsed
since the arrest OF defendant; that
the papers Of defendant showed no sat
isfactory data as to where they were to
obtain the relief so much sought for
that even IL they had obtained loan it
would have been but plunging them
selves deeper into an abySS of insOly-
ency which had long existed. The re-
spective counsel supported their respec-
tive positions at great length, Mr..
Morange expressing the conviction that
the name OF Duncan, Sherman Il Co.
could exert nopotent spell in our courts,
and that to vacate the order would be
not only a dangerous precedent but
would diminish the respect which the
community entertained for the courts
OF justice.
Mr.. Larocque made, in the course oil