The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1879-03-08
DAVID j. ELY,s MoRTGAoR
The Interesting TestImony OF How n was
Given llicIted IN Court Yesterday.


Tho suit Instituted by Robert II. Thomp-
son on Thursday to recover from the estate OF
David j. Ely $500. alleged to have been fraud
ulonty obtained upon bonds issued by Robert
g. Peck OF East Haddam, Conn. was continued
yesterday before Judge Spor. Tho charge
made was that tho advance OF money upon
Pock's bonds was mndo upon tho representa-
ton Of Mr. Ely. and that these representations
were made by Mr. Ely. no knowing at the timo
no made them that tho property upon which
tho bonds were hypothetical was morlgaged
for more than its value. and that Peck. the
nominal owner OF the property. was person
without character and not worth penny. The
suit ia ono Of n series similar which have boon
or will be instituted against tho estate OF Mr.
Ely, who all his lfs was Of unimpoached COM
mcroial standing and vcsiryman and tho
trcusurcr OF DIR. Tyng's (St. Gcorgesl Church
, Mr.. Thompson. having on Thursday testified
that he advanced tS.5OO to Peck on tho repre-
sentatons Of Mr.. Ely that the bonds which he
aecceIicd as security were perfectly good. and
thnt Peck was n wonlthy and honorable person,
found Pocks note and tho bonds worthless
when thg former came am. Que at the end otsixty
that the bonded properly. Of which Peck was
the nominal owner. had been nortgagedby him
very shortly after It came into his possession
for upwards of sl00000 and that ono mortgage
Of $4,000 had been assigned to Mr.. Ely pre-
representations OF the integrity of Peck and his
bonds to the witness. lie found that the several
mortgages had been foreclosed and that the
property had reverted In due course back to the
owners from whom Peck had nomnally bought
Pinckncy Amarr was called next as witness.
He testified that ia the summer OF 1874 that
being the time when tho Peck bonds we're
tioaed on the New York inarketl no had soon
Mr. Ely as trustee Of tho bonds. and that he had
given the most satisfactory account OF the
property upon which they were hypothecat,d
lie had made to tho witness tho same repre-
scniaiions identicnlly that Mr. Thompson had
declared were mnde to him, The witness was
acting for rhos. !. Brinsmade. who did not at
Onrc advance money on the Peck bonds hut
s"nt witness first To Connecticut TO look at the
property. The witness said that upon MIR.
Elys representation nlono no would readily
have advanced twenty five per cent. on the dol
lar on the bonds. but that after seeing the prop
cry n, told ms principal that he had better
Brlusmnde did not lend.
William Reed broker. testlned to repre-
the bonds identical with those testified to 10y
preceding witnesses. Mr.. Ely had said to him
that he bad never secn the bonded property
himself. but that he had sent his son-in. law. Mr..
Miller, 10 look at II, md TINT he had mudo very
favorable ren9rt The witness pr,apoSssd to NJ;
endorse them. but MIR. Ely refused. saying in
dong business" The witness did not make
any ionn on the bonds. but came away under
de- Impression that the on''r" thing WIS "swin-
julius Atwood was the next witness. At Eoat
Haddam he is the Town Clerk the County Regis
ter. the Judge II Probate. and the proprietor Of
cIiy which Peck had bonded. To the amount Of
stoOD, was worth IN round numbers not moro
than $4,000. II was nine miles from the Con-
ne,ucut River and ifnrult Of access. and very
bad for manufacturing purposes Tho witness
SAID that Peck WIS n nntyc OF East HHddani,
ana that he hnd always been regarded there IA
n sharper. He never had been responsible 10
the amount OF n dollar. and in 1872 Just previ-
Gus To his acquisition OF the property in ques-
ton. he had heen for some months nm inmate of
the county almshousc. In 1872 Peck bought
ihe properly ior $4,000, giving upon il "a mort
gage 81 Si3.OpO. and the same day he gave n
second MORTGAGE upon II for s25 600 which in
ss than month was duly transferred in the
town records to David J. Ely OF New York In
April. 1874. third mortgage for $4,000 wis
recorded upon this property On receiving the
assignment Of the second mOrtgnra from Mr.
Ey. in Arm. 1872 the witness testified that he
wrote 10 Mr.. Ely warning him that thiA mort
gage was n swindle. but this testimony was
ruled out MS the letter IN question was not forth
coming.
Joseph ]. Bowman, a mortgage and loan
broker. testified that Peck had put the bonds
into his hqnls 10 place. and that ho mad given
them 20 Cnhoon and othors The witness had
been 10 see MIR Ely with Peck. and Ely had told
the witness to send people TO him and he would
tell them about Peck and about the bonds. The
witness tried 10 raise money on some Of the
bonds. and sent persons Ia Mr.. Ely for refer
ence. The latter subsequently told witness that
a whole regiment had been to him about tile
learned MI about the value Of the farm from
William ii. GoOdspeed OF Goodspecd's Landing
Conn.
The case for the plaintiff was closed with this
witness The other side will bring their wit
ncsses to-day.