Delaware state journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1870-1883, 1881-04-21
oOCRT OF CHlyC6RP.
Adjourned Sesston-A Decree in the
Case of Crump vs.. HaIl-The John
p. Wells a Co. Case-Dnvtd Lemon
I'm COnfe1unt

Adjourned BesstOn-A Decree in the
Case Of Crump vs.. HnIl-The John
p. Wells a Co. Case-Dnvfd Lemon
I'm Contempt.
There was an adjourned session OF the
Court Of Chancery on Monday to oon-
slider business carried over from the last
February term.
Case OF William f. Crump and wife vs..
James A. Hall, assignee of Ann Rock, and
Ann Rock. The plaintiffs live In Texas,
the defendants in Maryland, the property
being in Delaware. The case has been
pending in the Court of Cbancery for two
and half years.
1t seems that Ann Rock had dover
right in the property and that SHE
assigned the property to the mortgage,
who proceeded to foreclose the mortgage
The plaintiffs now claim that the rents
from the property since il has been in
the possession OF the mortgage have
been sufficient to pay off the claim, and
acting on this they filed bill in 1878 for
an injunction to stay the foreclosure. i
decree was to-day given in favor of the
plaintiffs, who were represented by
Messrs. Patterson and Maris; GEORGE
Gray, ESQ.,, appearing for the defendants.
The COMMITTEES appointed to examine
Thomas Davis, Esq, for admission to the
Court of Chancery and the Orphans
Court, reported fayorably, and after til.
administering of the usual oath Mr.. Davis
was admitted as solicitor in these
courts.
One of the most important cases at this
session is that OF John G. Philips VS..
John P. Wells, ct al. The plaintiff and
defendant named were In partnership.
Wells, as will be remembered, having
raised and collected large amount Of
money on the firm signature, absconded.
The firm assets We're put in the hands of
l.. Mendenhall as receiver, and those
having claims filed them. The receiver
disallowed several Of the claims, among
them that Of d. II. Kent & Co. for
81 ,475.44. Messrs. Spruancs and Lore rep
resent Kent & Co.; Bates & Harrington
the receiver. The defense OF the latter is
that at the time of making the notes there
was balance (S524) due Wells & Co.,
and that the notes were accommodation
notes and without consideration.
Several witnesses were examined by
the counsel for Kent & Co., to prove that
the notes were valid and given for good
consideration. The taking of testimony
was followed by argument by Messrs.
Spruance and Bates.
David Lemon is in court awaiting the
pleasure of the Chancellor, charged by the
Delaware Fire Insurance Company with
violating an injunction laid upon him hy
the Court, the company having got an in
junction to prevent Lemon from disturb
ing the fixtures in his store at III Market
street. They claim that he did disturb
them and in fact tore them out.
AT the assembling Of the Court of
Chancery on Tuesday, at 10 o'clock, the
case of the Delaware Fire Insurance Com
pany vs.. David Lemon was continued.
As was above stated Lemon was
charged by the plaintiff with violating
an injunction which they procured from
the court upon him. In response to
interrogatories Monday afternoon Mr..
Lemsn made affidavit that he had not
violated the injunction. Benjamin
Nields, Esq, representing the corpora
ton, applied to the court to be allowed to
put in evidence contradictory to the de-
PENDANTS affidavit.
This was opposed by Messrs. Lore and
Gray, they contending that the defend
ants oath was sufficient to purge him OF
any contempt of court by violation OF the
injunction, and that in case like this no
evidence was admissible to contradict the
defendant upon his oath.
The case occupied the attention of the
Court until l.20 o'clock, and il was then
decided on the application of defendants
counsel that the case should go over to
some future day to hear argument on the
point as to the admissibility of the con-
Trajectory evidence, and in the meantime
the defendant should give 900 hail for
his appearance, with the further warning
by the Court that if the case should be
decided adversely to the defendant and
the goods should not be Forthcoming, the
Court would take this strongly into con-
sideration in administering the penalty.
The acceptance of the account of 4.
Ne ndenhall receiver in the case of Phillips
VS.. Wells & Company was then con
sdered by the Court, Messrs. Nields and
Bates for the receiver, W. C. Spruance,
Esq, opposed.
At 100 the court took recess until 3
O'Clock.
| In the Court of Chancery Tuesday
afternoon the account of +. Mendenhall
as receiver of Wells Il Co. was approved
and the chancellor allowed the receiver
SG25 for his personal services in settling
up the estate. William C. Spruance,
ESQ.,, counsel for Caroline Foote, a minor
presented petition praying that a rule
be laid upon Benjamin Foote of Mill
Creek hundred to show why he should
not be removed from the guardianship O
the said Caroline Foote. The petition
was granted by the Court and the rule