The Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1877-1885, 1881-03-28
RIVER RIPPLES.
IT he Decision In the K. N. [.
Packet Company.
Why the Petition Of the Assignor
Was Refused.

The telegraph columns Saturday con
tanned the information that the Davidson
faction of the Keokuk Northern Lin
Packet company had been defeated il
their effort to secure possession of th'
boats and other property of that organiza
| ton. La view of this fact that this deci
| sion ia of great importance to river mer
generally aud especially to business men o.
city who are awaiting the opening OF nava
CATION for cheap rates from St. Louis the
following SYNOPSIS of that ruling by Judge
Adams of the circuit court of st. Louis il
| given:
In the M after of the Keokuk Packet N
| L Packet Co., assiguor. Under the
assignn ent act.
The assignee. Joined by what are claim
ed to be creditors of the estate to the
extent of about $l45 GOO, moves the court
| for An order required the assignee to turn
over all his right. title and interest in the
| nroperty assigned. to the assignor, and In
conside alton thereof offers to give a bond
with condition to pay all debts which may
ultimately be allowed against the estate
mr. otherwise to secure the payment
of all such debts in any matter salts
| factory to the court. This motion is
| reristed by the assignee.
THE EVIDENCE
heard By tho court on the motion indicate
that all the debt of and claims against the
assignor do not exceed $lS5,0O As no
inventory or appraisement of the assigned
estate have yet been made. it is impossible
for the court to determine the quantity or
Quality of the assets which are the subject
of this N otiou. and as no hearing of claims
has yet been had by the assignee, under
the statute, or no other day ia court given
to creditors, il is impossible for the court
with any controlling accuracy TO know
what the Indebtedness of the estate
amounts to, or whether any or, if any,
how many of the the claims joining 10 this
motion. are just.
With this concealed uncertainty as to
estate and indebtedness, and for the pur :
pose of providing against the obvious en-
barrasments arising therefrom, the bond
alluded to is offered. upon the security of
which the court is asked to make the order
prayed for upon the assignee.
The court after citing the case of Janu.
airy versus Powell. in which the supreme
court state that "iD matters in WHICH the
circuit court can control the assignee are
all stated in the statute. and there is no
warrant for giving further" goes on to
prove that the statute does not admit of
the action asked By the plaintiff, in the
following language:
THE ASsIGNEE's RIGHT
to the estate represented in this assign
ment. so far as concerns this motion. is
neither doubtful nor contingent. 1t is the
entire property. subject. herhaps, to some
recognized liens. The court, therefore, on
this p0tiaa has no power over it under
section 395. as against the sssignea's oppo-
ton. Struck with the desirabiIity for the
interests of the public as we'll as the petit
tioning creditors herein and the apparent
reasonableness of accomplishing tie object
suggested il this molten, the courts mind
was led to section $50. as sffording possi-
bic authority for granting the order prayed
for. This is as follows: The circuit
court shall make an order for the sale of
all the real or personal estate conveyed by
any deed of assignment. either for cash in
hand or upon such reasonable credit, and
upon such other terms and notice. as shall
ops to all the parties iu interest,"" Gc. The
idea was. that sple of all the properly of
this estate in the bonds of the assignee
might be made TO the assigpor for and in
consideration of the bond suggested.
A DISTINCTION.
But upon reflection | am satisfied that
such . transaction would not be a sale
within the meaning of the statute, which
expressly provides for cash or credit, 1t
would rather be barter or exchange of
the assets now on hand for other assets :
a chose in action which could only be real
lied on by suit. 1t is also quite clear that
the sails here contemplated is to follow an
inventory and appraisement, such as are
provided for in former sections, which, as
l have before stated, have not yet been
made. ltis faIr to state that the distin
guished counsel for the uotson did not
claim under this section. and from them
the court received but little apparent sym.
patty in this suggestion. There being no
other provision of our statute which has
any bearing upon the question of authority
here presented, Itam necessarily brought
TO the conclusion that there is no warrant
in law for the motion before the court, and
that the same must be denied. 50
LATEs PHASE.
A dispatch from st. Louis, dated the
26th states:
The fight between factions 10 the Keo-
kuk Northern Line Packet Company
which has been going on so long in the
state conrts, was transferred to the Fed
eral tribunal this afternoon by Abraham
a.. Hutchinson and j. A Anderson of
Keokuk, stockholders In the company,
fling 10 the United States Circutit Court
. petition asking an injunction TO restrain
Charles Green. assignee. from interfering
10 ony way with the btopaEsg of the COM
pany. The suit is brought 10 the interest
Of the Davidson party
MINISTERS MEETING.
A meeting of the minister of the various