The New York herald., 1877-02-13

THE COURTS.
Important Injunction in a Heavy
Bankruptcy Case.
NICE REAL ESTATE SCHEME.
Valuable Fifth Avenue Property and Per-
picking Legal Questions.
PROFANITY Alb 0RIS PROFUNDlS.
NICE REAL ESTATE SCHEME
PROFANITY ABB oRIs PRoFUNDIS.

by LYMAN W. Bates. their attorney, against James
Mclean Henry II. Sotesbury, William d. Barbour
Thomas Cochran, William Barbour. and Thomas Coch'
ran and William Barbour as executors of Charles r
Cochran deceased, and Henry A. Page, William Turn
bull and Augustus Richards receiver OF the estate
OF Cochran, Mclean & Co., asking that certain claims
made against the estate OF Cocnrap Mclean N Co. by
the defendants Thomas Cochran aud william Bar
bour, individually and by them as executors Of
Charles 7. Cochran. and by tho defendant, Ihomas
Cochran, may be adudged not to DO lawiu' Claims
against the estate OF Cochran, Mclean Co. ana not
entitled to share the distribution OF The assets OF
the estate among creditors until all Just creditors of
the estate shall have been paid In full, with INTEREST,"
and that the defendants Thomas Cochran and William
Barbour individually and executors, be restrained
from receiving having any dividend from the assets
of The estate on account OF their claims and that the
receivers be enjoined from paying TO them
such dividend. The complaint in the case
states that Cochran. Mclean Il Co. failed IN
June 1876 with Liabilities OF about $500 00o that an
sc,iou ihereupon commenced by Henry H. siotes-
bury for the purpose Of obtaining decree OF dissolu-
tion of the Grn, which action tho receivers were
appointed and referee to take proof OF claims, and
that the proceeded to collect the assets OF tho
nrm and are aboa, to declare dividend IL is further
stated that in December last Thomas Cochran and
William Barbour lIed with the referee clam under
oath against the rm s5oe S35 81 averrins that that
sum was owing them by the hrm, exclusive OF loan
OF s5o0 Oeo placed at the Of the business, such
CLAIM beng specified in items as composed oil
si501.3 93. loaned cash at different times;
s22, 500 64 money used in the purchase OF notes OF
the firm open market; 100000 Endorsement
OF frm notes; 81 s5S o. note of W. T. Marcy Co.,
indorsea by Cochran Mclean Il Co., in tho hands OF
The claimants together with Sl2 6S interest; that
they AZ the same time as executors OF Charles p
t,arnra lodi Ella inn unler Oath d.
upon given by the Arm to them, and that Thomas
Cochran individually made further claim OF s9lS os
by HIM for the hrm; that the plaintiffs have
fled claim against the estate OF oyer
when Cochran and Barbour presented their caim
$500 335 "a, they proposed to waive their farther
claim OF $780, 700, put a loan sat the risk OF the
business. provided speedy settlement oil Their irs
demand should bo had; that II such settlement
could not be made they should insist upon the allow
ance q clam 10 tho amount OF 81 2O2, $40 81, Win
interest," which, II allowed, would reduce the divi-
dends business creditors of the firm 10 about thirty
per cent and that II not allowed the latter would re-
ceivc their claims III lulL 1t appears urther from the
complaint atdavits attached, that prior 10 1863 the
defendants James Mclean and Henry IL. Stoesbury.
became indebted 10 Cochran n Co. TO the amount OF
$3.50 00O that that year the two firms united,
forming new partnership, consisting oil Thomas
Cochran William Barbour and Charles 7. Cochran as
special partners and James Mclean Henry H.
sioesbury and Furgus Cochran as general partners.
TO be called Cochran, Mclean Co.. having nominal
cash capital OF 81, 600 900 and TO CONTINUE Tor nve
years. or this sum the special partners contributed
ranged by calling the old debt OF Mclean Stoles-
bury of $3.50 900 asset and turning in their old
stock OF goods and fixtures at a valuation OF
nearly $500 ooo both OF which amounts carried to
the credit OF the special partners as loan during
!hc nve years in which this partnership lasted the
special partners advanced, including cash, special
capital, the cid stock of goods and the debt
Of Mclean sto'esbury, about ., 4oo, ooo and
drew within that time Sl,35O,OO0 IN
cash. Notwithstanding the fact that they had
agreed TO 81 900 the firm at the risk OF the
business, and that the hrm losing money and was
Of Its term OF existence The plaintiffs also alegc that
the entire scheme was intended and contrved by the
defendants, Thomas Cochran, William Barbour and
Charles y. Cochran, to secure payment OF their old
claim against Mclean stotesbury and to carry on
general mercantile business through the defendants,
james Mclean Henry IL. Stotesbury and Furgus
Cochran, their agents and coparncrs, and to avoid
liability as general partners, and not Intended In
good faith TO be an actual limited partnership accord
ing law, and that the actual facts were not made
known creditors or persons thereafter becoming
creditors, but carefully concealed. The firm Of
Cochran, Mclean Il Co. expired by It's own limitation
on 'he Is. aay o. Juy, ioa ana upon 'nas h aay
fendants james Mclean, Henry H. Sotesbury and VIII
lam u. Barbour, called Cochran, Mclean Il Co. NO. =
Thomas Cochran and William Barbour individually
executors OF Charles T. Cochran deceased then
nominalIy retired from the business, but in order to
give credit 10 the firm gave out that they would
loan capital 1t. The complaint then states that
Cochran and Barbour did not then or about that
time advance or loan any money whatever to the
firm but they secretly and falsely estimated and
that their JOINT interest remaining IN the CO.
narincr SHIN assets of Cochran Mclean Il Co.
No $500 900, and that such Interest called
by them loan to the new firm and published as such;
that bsequcntIy Cochran and Barbour as executors
OF Charles 4. Cochran insisted upon and obtained tho
rrumissory notes of Cochran, Mclean II Co. No. l In
liquidation of the supposed interest Of such estate in
such firm for onenrd oI the nominal value OF assets,
with interest added, making about S265, 900, which
notes paid to the amount OF $780, 000 that Coch-
and Barbour then estimated their interest in Coch-
ran Mclean 4 Co. No remaining in the business Of
Cochran, Mclean 4 Co. NO. to amount TO s4S5, 900,
TO which they added interest sufficient to make the
sum $500, 0C0, aud then from time 10 time contributed
5000 000 which all the money they ever advanced
II rs stated in addition that the firm OF Cochran. Nc
Lean & Co. No. l on the LIST OF July, 1874 were not
worth enough TO pay the debts Of firm, exclusive
OF money owing the special partners other capital or
pretended loans, that instead of Thomas Cochran
William Barbour and the estate OF Charles +. Cochran
OF such firm being about 500 000 the firm in fact
insoyent and had no interest Whatever III crein except
uncertain and contingent interest In unavailable
assets not realized; that James Mclean Henry H.
stotcsbury and william d. Barbour never had any
actual capital in the firm OF Cochran, Mclean l.
Co., their interest being only nominal and at all times
subject TO debts equal TO greater than Its assets;
that Thomas Cochran and William Barbour in
reality the principal copartncrs seeking to conceal
Their interest and induce The public to believe such
loan OF money; that IN pursuance OF such
secret plan they pretended to advance such firm
from time to time money as loans, and pretended to
purchase In the market the commercial paper OF the
firm considerable amount but that such pretended
loans and purchases were made in the old hrm name
Of Cochran 4 Co. that they wore necessary advances
which they made to prevent the failure OF the copart
ncrship and In order to strengthen It's credit, and
were the advances of general partners and were not
general loans OF creditors AS to the claims against
inc estate made by Cochran and Barbour
The plaintiffs aegc that 1t is not true that
their the assets Of Cochran, Mclean e. Co.
No. amounted to 5000 exclusive OF the pre-
Tended loan OF $70O,000, inasmuch as all the money
ever advanced by them to the firm would not amount
to 500 900; and, furthermore that they were acting
as general partners, and therefore liable TO the fu
amount OF tho debts Of the firm.
Upon the allegations set forth rs given above tenn
porary injunction has been granted by Judge Donohue
OF tho Supreme Court, restraining Thomas Cochran
and William Barbour individually, or under the name
of Cochran IL Co., their agents, attorneys and scr.
wants from receiving any dividend from the assets OF
the latc firm firms Of Cochran, Mclean Il Co.,
uamed In said complaint on account OF any CLAIM or
ealns made by them against said assets and that tho
dcfcndnnts, Henry A. Page, Henry Turnbull and
Aucustc Richard receivers OF the properly OF tho
said Cochran Mclean 4 Co., do also refrain from pay
ing tho said Tncmas Cochran aud William Barbour.
either individually or under the name oi Cochran Il
70 or as executors o Charles T. Cochran, deceased,
anv such dividend until the further order judgment
ni this court This order made returnable the