The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1877-07-06
THE BROokLrN OIL REFINERY.
Justice Gilbert Granting the Motion TO Dis
solve the Injunction.

On Nov. 4. 1874. Mrs. Nancy Stokes, mother
of Edward S. stokes. who WIS then the owner Of
the standard oil Works at Hunto r. Point with
her husband. Edward II. Stokes. since deceased.
gave mortgage on the property OF $1,000 tn
Ccrhal Brainard. This mortgage was assigned
To- Cassius II. Read. proprietor ol the Hoffman
House. He forocluscd it and bought in the oil
works on the 18th Of May last for $4,000.
Soon afrrward Jahcz \. B0stwick x Co.. oil re-
nnnr-. vino held a liasc from Mrs. Stokes ut
sl3.OuO a year. expiring. May !. 1873 began pro-
cccdngs TO dchur the completion OF the sale, al
loging that the purchase had been made by
Ca-sius II. Road for the benefit of Mrs Nancy
Sfpkr- and Edward s stokes. through u
combination against Bosiwiek ~ C9.. as
les, '-, and mat Mrs Many St9k's hau sup
llioi Mr.. load with a.. purchase MONEY.
'rhry ciuimei TINT Mr.. Road wa the only
lidlcr at the sale. that he did not sign
the terms of the sale. ana that ne
did not nay any money down. ~ WAS required.
rNpcft the expenses of the Sncrn Ih0y Hnlm-
ed lurthcr that the purchase was ior the pur;;
business. either as NJ. kcad partner or agent
or alnu". amt that ~tlkos had Threatened 70 dis
POSSESS them. which threat. If calu,d out
would grcati, inurc their business. A. they had
over slOu.uOu invested there. and could not read
iiy chung. their locatiun They prayed Tor an ~
lul. ton restraining Cassius II. Read from re-
r.iNlng tho dn..i tothe property from thu sheriff
Of Kings county, and STAYING all proceedings
The lnjun.ton y'us obtaintd ON Juno /. On
tho aplliHWipu pt Mr. Franklin Bartlett, Httuf-
ney to- Mr.. Il ad. Justice Gilbert granted AN Of
der ou the 2Oth II Jun' tl show why the inlunr-
zion -lpuli NOT be- dissolved. On tho 2jth 81
/ Junr Nj ". O. Bartlett of counsel flr Mr. Road
| ". k,Ht, which was read. r"clted unt
i was his intention to embark iq
get J. 'sss s-ion % his oil works. He swor", as
did Mrs. Stokes that no money was furnished
him 90 nhase the murigugei property. aud
tiai She ~ not uld or coop rae III thc tore
closure. Mrs stokes swore that 81. never riw
Read in her life. ant that her son Edward was
not h'r agent. and had not acted as such in the
ndunr.
justice Gnbort Yesterday granted the motion
t. q --olyc the Injunction.
IT, -nys in his opinion that he is unable TO
discover any ground on which the action could
he maintained The Judgment was regularly
obtained The plaintiffs acquired all the inter
cst they cnlmed IN tn mortga4,ed premises ~
tenants q Mr. Stokes after The mortsa4e was
madc. Ii II no coucern Of theirs whether
her title i an absolute one, or If held by
her as security. merely or upon trust
n- being fraudulen, rs TO creditors II the SON.
because tnrv are not creditors. The tenant
cannot dispute bis landlords title In short.
the only ground on which they can with any
show uf reason ask for r"l"f against the lIltg-
mrnt oi foreclosure and the sale HEREUNDER Is
that Of fraud and conspiracy, But rglrf
at al. could he attained only by
means Of a motion in TIE foreclosure
suit u~et. There Is N precedent oi 'pa.
rat action TO- unnul IN lgment ~ ~" ground
of tho kind Of fraud alleged. Fraud VIII h
Nhiil'N lhi- Nl 'li u tiu VIII II ',p'l IT, - ~
r"ily in pr, ur,ng t The fraud alleged g ~
pititly amt miy dNufrd. s. far H. uIlrars
Mr. Read was bona u o. purchaser ~ the nintt-
ElEN. and subsequently hream" "a" purell r.
| u tue mor'gngri premises ia good inih.
| lie Is cuuir4 to lr'ttfiyn ~ slt n. Ihe
drinndaut- might have defended the fore 'lo-
sure suit. hut df uhartt". uhefalurt from doing
! Icon tle ground unt thry lpd mo- iaicnoc;
The Justice iIttl"r holds that 30 wt- uli lent
| H. make Jahe2 BpstWick alone. OF the firm Of
| Jahe1 Bostwick X Co.. party To- the ioreclu-u ro
! suit. and adds that the plaintiffs may he entitled
| tp relief hy way of reaching the surplus ar sing
| the sum for which Nh Read j. 10 Civ mort
la-e t. Mrs Stokes is a surplus. That being
So, the plaintiffs SHOULD he protected ~ u. ir
! claim upon that. Mr.. Read. how YER mas no
int rest ia that question. Tn plaintiffs COM
plain that lrtgug p. instead Of cash. is e. he
| given for thnf surplus. Thry had notice ~ tho
! ori'r changing ihc, Iu igm"ni oi the Court IN
| that D, -rert. The Ju-fic" adds
81 aAr1t = -prN" a. pur hasor NJ IN" T. re-
ol ~ilrs sale of the fan ,nluiuu ~ tu" IfnuN.y
lUrr na-.i. hecau-" 10 WA Su'l''t the pIalutil-
! po-- --i.u th"igirour'y Ifrr lra-". I Its
Junior 90 the riOrt-u's. l. necessarily cui on hy
! tn sale. ant IL cannot be continued lu fNr'e
| Tor any irngtl OF time without frustrating
| Just. In short the plaintiffs. hy oui.ttlu- e. dee
lem or Co. tender The m0rtlus Il .lt, on 90 hi ~
Tho -lle. hny, permitted the prop riy Co. %" - Z.
ana ll.y now sock the uli of tl' court 90 eu ihle
mui'- ~ 'ftur against his Will That ai ciiu-
| MI hH AL .ldf 4 upon any grounds rini"i h'gc.
II! ord r. moving nll l' ~tAfl,- o. tAf eoiu-
! rl't.uu 20 the sale" ami anord protection io tu"
| l'Wni is IN r'rr't io ihe surplus are 10 "e
| iiwi On iN' inye n1u'e.
~ this decision iul JUST '" Is done ~ Cas-ius
| u. hfti. tlah whom 10 more fair and VIZ lht
pan, ll,es IN "a. ely II NOW l9rs; For Mr.
Me--rs. james X. Hill. Bass 1T. sAoudy. AMI
cad u1-e al Colt