The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1888-03-07
UNDER FULL HEADWAY,
LEGAL CONTROVERSIES GROWING
OUT OF THE COMPRESS FIRE.
Col. VIM. Il. Carroll, as Counsel for Cot
ton Mills and Other Concerns, Files
Five Interesting Bills In the Chancery
Court--An Opening Wedge.

WHCu TIC Rrtdt uIo ucculIcu al tis
city, November II, 1887, destroying two
presses and sheds Of the Merchants 8 Cot
ton Press and Storage company, together
with 1850 bales of cotton, there were
suspicious and convictions that the courts
would have TO settle many questions
which would arise in consequence. These
apprcheusions it appears, were well
founded, as numerous suits have already
been fled, and many more will doubtless
come to the front in the near future.
These have been expected, and in conse-
quence the company's stock has been
somewhat depressed and sluggish.
Col. William II. Carroll, of the law firm
Of Taylor & Carroll, as counsel, filed in
tho chanccry court, late yesterday after
noon, five bills, which puts the legal con-
tests under full Roadway. The first was
by the Whiiefeld mills, vt Newburyport,
Mass, w. the Newport News 4 Mlissis-
sippi Valley Railway company. On the
purchased, through Messrs. Patterson,
Muller & Co., Of this city, 100 bales OF cot
ton. ut the price OF "a, 935.60. On the same
day the cotton was sent to the Merchants
Cotton Prcss and Storage company's
warehouse to be taken care OF, compressed
and delivered TO the defendant, which had
contracted to carry it from Memphis to
Newburyport at the rate Of Goa cents per
100 pounds and deliver TO order, notifying
Stephen Green, treasurer.
Ijy contract between the Newport
News 4 Mississippi Valley company and
tho Merchants Cotton Press and storage
company, the latter company stipulated, in
consideration Of so cents per bale TO be
paid ii, that il would insure said cotton for
the benefit OF the owners and transporta-
ton company from its receipt till its
actual delivery, after compression, TO the
former company aboard its cars. The
clause in the carrier company's bill Of lad
ing. that the carrier shall have the benefit
Of any insurance that may have been
effected upon or on account OF said goods,
is stricken out by the agreement OF the
parties 10 that contract, so the complain
ant ID advised that inasmuch rs tho COM
press company insured the risk for the
benefit of complainant by express contract
with the carrier, who was the complain.
ants agent, that that insurance inures TO
tho benefit OF the complainant, and II Is
entitled in court TO recover the same in
precisely The same manner ms though I'M
insurance company had issued TO the car
ricr policy OF insurance in express terms
covering said cotton TO the full value
thereof. loss, II any, payable 10 the owners
of said cotton.
The bill states that II was upon the ex-
press agreement that said cotton was 10 be
Insured 10 its full value, for the benefit Of
tho owners thereof, that the same was de-
livercd 10 the compress company Tor Gus
tody and compression, and delivery TO the
carrier by Patterson, Muller & Co. for
complainant Complainant states that on
tho 18th day OF November last past, said
cotton, before its delivery by the Mer-
chants Cotton Press and Storage company
10 the Newport News & Mississippi Valley
company, was totally destroyed by fire,
and that II was on that day Of the value OF
$,27i92 Immediately after the FIRE COM
plainant furnished each OF the defendants
with abatement Of the loss. and made de-
mand upon each OF them for payment
On December IL complainant wrote TO
The railway company, and in reply no
coived letterfrom Holmes Cummins, gen.
ernl counsel for the company, letter de-
nying that compliments cotton ever came
into its hands, but was destroyed In the
compress, and the bill 80 charges
The bill then rccites tho fact OF n con.
tract between the compress and railway
companies, In which the latter agrees not
20 transport any cotton except such "a &
compressed by that company. In consld'
eration that the compress company agrees
that Il will insure, compress and deliver on
board the cars Of the railway company,
for so cents per bale, all cotton which Is 70
le carried over the line OF that railway
company, and that the insurance shall be
for the benefit OF tho owners and the car
ricfs as well, and that when said fire tool
place the said balcs Of cotton were within
the operation Of said contract; therefor,
the railway company Is entitled TO en-
force II, especially In view Of the fact tina
the defendant, though requested, declines
20 do 10.
Complainant further shows that the In
suance company, which had issued to J
an open policy, declines 10 pay the loss
assigning M tho reason therefor that II
riAk did not attach until said cotton wa
loaded aboard the cans OF the carrier
Tho compress company agreed will
a Patterson, Muller a Co. 10 insure said cot
ton from In receipt until loaded aboard tn
cans OF the defendant and that II has nc
insured its own risks. or taken out insui
ance for the benefit OF the owners OF cottol
70 the amount OF about 500, 900 In abou
forty solvent insurance companies, III
names OF which Il has mover disclosed /
any authenticated form, but complainant
charges that all OF said insurance was 70
the benefit Of the owners Of the cotton d,
stroyed by the fire.
Complainant charges that the comprci
company proved the loss, amounting
1880 bales, and furnished list Of th
cotton burned, a. follows
A a