The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1883-08-15
THE SHAW FAILURE,
An Injunction Obtained by John Wool
redge of Lynn.

An Injunction Obtained by John Wool
redge of Lynn.
BosToN, Aug IA hearing was had be-
fore Judge Colburn of the Supreme Court TO-
day on bill in equity brought by John Wool
ridge of Lynn, against Fayette Shaw & Broth
ers and Ferdinand A. Wyman, assignee in in
solyency Of Shaw & Brothers. for an iniune-
tion to restrain the defendants from transfer
ring or assigning notes to the amount of $685.
5S7 made by Charles Fl. Ward, payable to his
order and Endorsed by Mr. Woolredge for the
accommodation of Ward. The plaintiff alleg-
es that Ward gave these notes to Shaw & Bros.
for the purpose of raising money for him
(Ward), and that no money was ever raised on
them by Shaw, and they are no part Of the as
sets of that firm. never having been negotia-
ted. Some Of the notes have already become
due and have been protested, and the balance
of them will mature within few weeks.
Messrs. George o. Shattuck and F. A. Dear
born appeared for Mr. Woolredge, and Hon.
e. r. Hoar and George W. Morse for Shaw &
Brothers. The first witness called was Mr..
Wyman, the assignee of Shaw and Brothers,
who was examined as to the financial transac-
tions between Ward and Shaw, and said that
he was unable to tell at the present time the
state of the accounts between the parties al
though he was of the opinion that there was
balance due Shaw from Ward.
Mr.. Woolredge was then called to the stand
by Mr.. Shattuck and testified that he was in
no way idebted to Mr.. Ward; that he ind orsed
the notes in question simply for the accommo-
dation of Mr.. Ward, and that he had no doubt
OF his tinantial ability TO pay all the notes.
There was no other paper bearing his name
which was overdue. These notes had been de-
t.,4 De- - Ia g.
collection. In further answer to Mr.. Shattuck
Mr.. Woolredge said he knew nothing about
the notes having been delivered to Shaw.
In the course of some informal discussion
which occurred between counsel 1t was stated
that notes to the amount of $160,000 were CIV
en- by Ward to Shaw, and the latter gave
Ward written agreement to take care of
them at maturity. 1t was also stated by Mr..
M. +. Dickinson, assignee OF Mr.. Ward, that
an accounting would undoubtedly show bal
ance dueShaw.
Mr. Ward testified that for a year and a half
he had let Shaw have his notes for Shaw's ac.
commodation, and Shaw had also raised money
for his (Ward's) benefit. The notes bearing
the Endorsement of Mr.. Woolredge were de-
posted with Shaw as collateral, to be used only
in case Wards paper should not be taken care
of at maturity. Each of these notes had on
one corner the letter 3D." which indicated
that they were duplicates Mr.. Ward thought
that the total amount OF accommodation notes
uU Hau l6b MI OudW nave was 6uOub PloO,uUU,
and at the time Shaw failed he had in his pos
oession about $4,000 of these notes, which had
not been discounted Not dollar had been
raised on the Wooredge notes, but was all
raised upon another set OF notes. The notes of
Woolredge were delivered to Shaw after the
first set of notes had been discounted
In arguing the case for Mr.. Woolredge, Mr.
Shattuck claimed that until there had been an
adjustment of the accounts between the two
firms it would be inequitable to compel Mr.
Woolredge to pay the par value of these notes.
Until the equitable set offs between the two
firms were determined it would not be quita-
BILE to collect the notes of Mr.. Woolredge.
Judge Colburn said the case presented many
disputed facts and complications. but he had
concluded to grant an injunction to restrain
the defendants from negotiating the notes, but
not preventing their collection in the ordinary
way
shaw & Brother's Additional Attachment.
Additional attachments of the real estate of
f. Shaw & Bros. have been placed in Penob-
scot county as follows:
S. B. Hume of Eastport, $4,000; Casco Ma
tional Bank of Portland, 100000; Samuel
Greeley of Readfeld, $4,000.