The Portland daily press., 1881-01-12
THE WELLS CASE.
A SKETCH OF THE ALLEGED CROOK
EDNESS OF COUNSEL.
Action of the Bar Association.

|
W. Baker have for a long time interested the
cumberland Bar, as far as they had knowledge
OF them The examinations of Mrs Baker
and Mrs. Wells and the proceedings in the
Superior Court in the suit against the assignee.
w. X. Neal, are matters of public record open
to the inspection of all, but never collected
and published. A committee of the Bar. COM
posed of Messrs. Geo. f. Holmes, 7. Ell. Has
kell and John G. Cobb, having fully examined
into the charges and allegations against Mr..
Wells. reported to the Bar Association yester.
day morning. By vote of the Bar Associa-
| ton it was decided to keep the proceedings Sc
cret until such time as they saw fit to make
them public. Of course, if reporter could
| gather any information outside it was a differ
emit matter. 1t is reported that the association.
after hearing the report of the committee.
voted to present the case to the court, which
is virtually sustaining the allegations and
charges OF the assignee, who, it is understood,
presented the charges to the Bar for action.
Inc following information has been in our
possession some time, but withheld at the re-
quest OF interested parties until Mr.. Wells had
an opportunity to appear before the committee
and make such statements as he thought prop
er. The matter will be brought before the
court In few days, if report is correct There
has been no disposition on the part of the
assignee or any member of the committee or
Bar, to prejudice Mr. Wells by the publica-
ton OF any advance charges or statements, but
the matter is now becoming public talk and as
such we give our readers the benefit of it.
Mrs. Hattie W. Baker was formerly in the
fancy goods business in Portland and sold out
to another person. About Oct 1, 1879, she
decided to go into business again, with about
$500 capital, and with this, and credit, she
purchased in Boston and Portland about $1,000
worth of goods, and in the middle of that
month opened store on Congress street.
Shortly after-the 18th of October-there was
suit brought against her by her creditors and
keeper put into her store. Mr. Chas W
wells, her attorney, made an arrangement
by which the keeper was removed and Mrs.
Baker agreed to pay up in monthly INSTALL
ments OF ten dollars. The 9th of November
she made mortgage Of her stock to Mr.
Wells for $500, payable in year, and on Dec.
olst, ne took possession of what remained of
the stock of goods under the mortgage Mrs.
Baker then left the city, returning about Jan.
10th, 1850. On the second day of January her
creditors filed petition in the Insolvency
Court and warrant was issued. The mes
senger obtained possession of the stock of
goods, then in store ON the corner of Boyd
and Oxford streets, in the basement of a house
where Wells resided. The messenger sold
what goods he obtained, at open sale for S125.
On Jan 81, Mrs. Baker furnished the mes
senger with schedule of her assets and list of
her creditors, in which it appeared she owed
about S75O besides the $3.50 note to Wells. Her
assets consisted of the stock of goods which
she scheduled at $1065. a claim against Louise
Wyman for $3.50 and receipt from Fred Far
row of Boston for $500.
On February 16 Mr.. w. X. Neal was chosen
assignee at the first meeting of creditors, and
Immediately proceeded to make the examina-
ton OF Mrs. Baker before Judge Peabody. As
part OF her statement she said said she receiy-
ed $S99.50 from Mr.. Wells on account of the
mortgage she gave him on Nov. 6, 1879. OF
that money she took $500 to her boarding
house and kept it there till Dec 10, when she
wentto Boston, and by advice of Mr.. GRAHAM,
an attorney, she deposited the money in the
hands OF Farrow, who was a broker, for the
benefit of her creditors. She said she kent a
cash book and books of accounts and thew
were left in the store and taken possession of
by Mr. Wells, as she supposed, when he took
possession OF the stock. Mr.. Wells was also
examined on the same matter before the
Judge, and stated that he let Mrs. Baker have
the money and that after she went into insol-
vency, or about the Goth of January, he learn
ed she had deposited $500 in Farrow's hands
as stated by her. Also that Wells went to
Boston taking Mrs. Bakers 5000 note and
hunted up Farrow and sold tho Baker note to
Farrow, taking Farrow's note for $720, pay a.
Bile to him-Wells-or order, at six months
with interest; that he had endorsed and trans
ferred the note to his wife, Nellie c. Wells, as
he was indebted to her. He produced the
original $720 note, and testified that he re-
ceived it from Farrow at Boston, on its date.
January 23d, 1880. This statement was made,
and the note produced, March 49, $780,
Wells made demand on the assignee for
the money received from the sale of the goods
and brought suit to recover, April 10Th. The
action was tried in the Superior Court Oct.
18th, 18th and 18th, and resulted in verdict
LII bLO pidiutlA lOE 9llO. "A iuOUlOQ Tor new
trial was flled and the matter rested. In the
mean time the assignee made demand on
Farrow, March 10th, 1880, for the $500 and
brought suit in the Municipal Court, Boston,
to recover that sum. This suit was tried Nov.
23d, and Judgment was there rendered in
favor OF the assignee for $500 and interest,
with costs. At the trial of this suit Farrow
testified that he received no money from Mrs.
Baker and that the receipt was given to enable
Mrs. Baker to account to her creditors for
this amount of money at the suggestion of
Wells. About the last of December Wells
purchased the claims of all the petitioning
creditors except one and paid the expenses of
the officers of the insolvency court and as
signee, and withdrew the objections that had
been filed by the creditors to the discharge of
Mrs. Baker, and the suit between Wells and
the assignee in the Superior Court was entered
"neither party, no further action for the same
cause
The assignee claims, if the statement of
Farrow is true, that the receipt for $500, pro-
duced by Mrs. Baker, was not given to her
Dec. 20, but was made and given to Wells Jan.
23d; that the note for 1920 produced by Wells,
March 18th, was not made by Farrow until
after March 10th.
Further the assignee claims that the produc-
ton of this note, and the statement made by
Wells that he received it Jan. 23j, at Boston,
was fraudulent and evil practice on his part
and contrary to his oath as an attorney and
intended by him to mislead and deceive the
assignee in the settlement of the estate, and
that the proceedings from the time of the
making of the mortgage were intended to con-
ceal the actual disposition of the estate of Mrs.
Baker, to prevent its coming into the hands
of the creditors or assignee after insolvency.
| 80 Accidents.
Nixon's soap team was wrecked on CONNER
| cial street yesterday morning, the horse taking
fright and running away. Ashes, bones, soap
|