Daily globe., 1879-06-22
OUT OF COURT.
TATUTE OF LIMITATION PLEADED
WITH GOOD EFFECT.

The Suit of Anderson Against the First
National Bank Comes to q Sudden Ter
mination-Judge Flandrau Says that
Charges of Fraud Having Been With
drawn the Statute of Limitation Can
Itun-The Court Allows the Plea, and the
Case Continued for Further Argument
He Explains His Side, and Alleges that
All Charges of Fraud arc False.
The case of VIM. L. Anderson against The
First National Bank was resumed in the
United States circuit court, yesterday morn
ing. If the audience was interested and
numerous the day before, yesterday it was
augmented in numbers and increased in
interest.
The novel features of the suit, coupled
with the high standing of the party aimed
at, Horace Thompson, through the defend
ant, combined to attract large attendance,
and keep them interested during the pro-
ceedings.
JUDGE FLANDRAU's PLEA.
At the opening of court, judge Flandrau
took the floor and addressed the court on
the matter at issue. The Judge began by
stating that the theory of the plaintiff had
been from the first that respectable gentle
man, the head of the greatest banking in
stitution in the State, or west of Chicago,
had been guilty of gross fraud. In view of
that defendant had joined issue without in
terposing the statute of Limitation.
From the beginning the defendant had
repelled all insinuation of fraud implied,
and was solely actuated by this to make
issue with plaintiff The case now, how
ever, had assumed shape in which, under
the pleadings, the plaintiff might recover
for money belonging to the firm of Strong
& Anderson paid to the bank in discharge of
the debt of Strong, even if innocently
received by the bank. In view OF
this unexpected aspect of the case
Judge Flandrau stated that he wished to
amend the answer to the complaint by en-
iering the plea of the statute of Limitation.
He supplemented this request by repeating
that the character of reputable gentleman
had been assailed, one who was at the head
of the greatest financial institution west OF
Chicago. His character having been thus
assailed, and he charged with conspiracy tc
defraud, he had purposely omitted tc
interpSse the plea of the statute of limita.
ton to the complaint-he was anxious to &C
to trial on the issue as made out in the com
plant. The amount of money as compared
with the reputation of this reputable gentle
man was mere bagatelle. In this connec
ton the speaker alluded to the publication
of the proceedings of the day before in tht
GLOBE. He declared it was given in tn.
most obnoxious form, (but for all that, JUS
as it occurred in court and was wholly un
called for, though likely to the satisfaction
of the plain. iff.
Mr.. Pierce here interrupted to disclain
that the plaintiff had anything to do will
the publication. In fact he declared for Mr.
Anderson that he was averse to having news
paper mention of the matter at all
He had actually taken it upon him.
self to request the papers
not to notice the case, but it was we'll know1
that in such matters the newspapers exer
cised their own discretion, (And Mr.. Pierce
might have added that the case was publicl,
tried in public court and was public prop
erty for public publication.)
| Judge Flandrau didn't wish to be misun
derstood; he made no charge that Mr.. Pierc
or his client had caused the publication. I
was unfortunately done, and merited NJ
further notice. Continuing, Judge Elan
drau said in view of the fact that Mr.. Pierc
had abandoned the charge of fraud, Their
was no impropriety in interposing tn,
| statute of limitation.
MR.. PIERoE's REPLY.
Mr.. Pierce in response remarked that tn
evidence introduced yesterday showed NJ
abandonment of the charge of fraud agains
the reputable gentleman who had joinet
issue with his client. Additional evidence
! of such character would be introduced a.
to substantiate the charge of fraud to tn
entire satisfaction of the jury. Mr.. Pierc
declared that the nature of the complain
was known to counsel ever since it wa
filed. He saw fit to join issue and it wa
now too late to change attitude and to at
tempt to protect his client by th
incorporation of the plea o
the statute of limitation. Counse
confessed that while he had not intended t.
or was prepared to prove all that might es
| tablish the fraudulent connivance of Thornp
son in this transaction, he was not dis
posed to abandon the charge of fraud. II
had expected to prove which was necessar
! to the present action.
| The court here interposed to observe tina
so much was charged in the complain,
a part of which, in the nature of fraud, wa
charged, counsel claimed he was not willin
or prepared to prove, that he did not see no,
the court could do other than admit the pie
of the statute of limitation.
The question of fraud being involved
Judge Flamdrau stated that alone induce
them to go to trial. That abandoned, b
would insist upon his motion to amend tn
answer.
Mr.. Pierce observed that he was not pre-
pared to make an argument on the poir
| raised just now, being taken by surprise b
the unexpected action of of opposing cour
sci.
The court thought, under the circun
stances, that Mr.. Pierce should be allowe
time to prepare it; accordingly the order We
made allowing the answer to complaint to I
SO amended as to introduce the plea of lin
itation, and the case was continued.
The Court-"How about the costs of th
case. think, Judge Flandrau, under th
circumstances, ) on ought to pay the costs.
Judge Flandran-I ana hardly under tn,
impression. We would not have entered tt
plea, had not the plaintiff made change {
front. We deemed it igloble to interpos
the plea of the statute of limitation. We
The Court Oh, Judge Flandran, this is
question of money involved, and under tl
circumstances the costs are assessed again
you-the SUN is small, after all.
The Court, turning to the jury-Gentl
men, you are discharged.
And thus the case ended, for the presel
at least.
The Other Side.
The pleading of the statute of limitatie