The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1890-05-27
INABILITY OF A PARTNER
DECISION RENDERED
az JUDGE r. w. HUGHES.

=. ReshschtId 4 Co. Va. Martin Powers
he Court Decided the Fund. ""s'
Equally Divided Betwco" NV
tors.
Judge Robert W. Hughes, In the on'.co
c.s.os c;rn;, Court, yesterday filed MS
orin;on in tie case Of Hothsch'id w. ~
~. agains, II. ID. Hoge, trustee, ct ais
I'm Tho The b,h of December last Messre'
Z usrt,r & Powers. notion and White goods
MERCHANTS. made an assignment, in which
Tho firm OF Rothschild 4 Co. and the other
plaintifs In the suit were unpreierreu VIZ
d,,ors. shortly afterwards Rothschlld ~
% NJ Now York. and others, brought SUIT
.rs;,s, the dcfunct firm Of Martin fo"-
ors and In their bill prayed the court TO set
ss;,c The deed rs unjust and Illegal
KINDS or ASSIGNMENTS.
Tn his opipion, after citing the law in such
cases, Judge Hughes saiu'
~The supreme Court o. hppSai,s1 ,ho, as.
,,o,a in numerous decisions has held lha. az
''n,cnss sor The benefit of creditors WiiVn
S,vc nrefercnce 10 one or more cio9i,'ors,, W
classes OF creditors. over othtts, ~ ' - &c
<rcss nom fraud, are not VOID mercy "H ~ ~
esv,nt OF preferences being gwen lie
Se~ and the facts of THIS case
bcing as thus svt SCI rv,o NJ Martin q
Snwsrs executed to Howard ID hoge as 'ius ,,
ice on me Sih day Of December. 1851 uvSy
II assignment by which they c0hNcSeu 49,, .i. ~,
their property belonging 20 crnditors and
~ which distributing their obligations 10
creditors into i've different c as,s, .h MI
proyiicd that the assets oi 'ne , nian male
L. so,d and pavment of the prOceeus ni"uV
s ,ha creditors holding their obilga-
tiops IN the order named III ,ne
siceJ. paying those OF tne mr.. IT, Oi" -
An mi an :, on each successive class 20
- cetxc navmcnt In full according rs lnc
fund would hold out. EXCEPT one on ~. Nv
hanks the names of the ciedltois vi , wy IN
DO not appear upon the lace OF wy ,oi,,n an
a. a,,.ars from the the evidence hkci, ~, III
49,. fn,sc thai the Two special endorstis T. ~.
Tavlor and N. SwinefOrd were chuoisSis ~
fl,c firm 10 an aggregate amount Oh S.9,
900. II does not appear mat ,i' a,yac ~ or
tndirectly in the making of TINS assisnihcnl I; T;
The compliments bill ana suhplS,iiV '.,.
b,I asan the deed thus descilpeu, ply ply :
s,,., Al I've set aside as void, and that inc iuhu
which has resulted from the sales anu collCV
tions OF the trustee shall be paid ilis' an y,
Henry Rothschild & Co, VINO nlcd me DIS rs -. ~
..o,oniaint and there brought me iuhu Ih.'
MI pp"n,i = me supplemental bill charges
that the special partners are Iduici as So, 80
eral mariners. for che entirc lnuep..',.' -
the Arm and prays the Court 10 eiiV'VV '""'
liability.
JUDGES OPINION.
The Judge decides that II Is clear rs con-
coded bv counsel, that the deed eNecu'eu oA
general partners, was Invalid as pro- lIe :.
by section 2,sIi. But the court Hecil,'." ~
grant the prayer OF the coillPIt'n'n ,',,' ~
maxim a decree declaring greater mum,
hor Of references between the creditors Al
This firm than the deed made which was
fomplaiDcl of.
81 ng,callv this would be condoning one
fraud upon section 2e1l win nn ,'I, /"
lesser fraud with a greater one. IheJndse ue,
cides that the fundamental law OF spcchi
partnership. which provides Tor pro iasa pa!
ment of creditors must preNall IN ms cass
As all contracts made win spcclhl P 1i :
ners are i'm contemplation of the Law, maze
and given on the faith OF an equal uis'IIu ~
zion Of the sssets In the event OF la,lulc Oh
he faith of section 1914, Whlch ioiD4U' P4N'
erenees as between creditors.
PAIDIS CASH.
Tho co,,rt further decides that the special
WARMERS. Howard, swineford, and l.. Il.
Tav,or complied with the lawOn paying
their input in cash, and, therefore, are not
liable as general partners for any laliure
in that respect. The court also decides
that:
Tho act of the General Assembly of Feb-
ruary. 1888. winch required the names y,
special partners To be consplcuousiy Pos,eu
~, front of The places of business of The spe-
-cial Partnership. after May 1, 1Sss, did mol
apply respectively IN this case, ana mere
fore the special partners were not IaD ,, DC DC
cause their names were not thus posleu, rs
The law ala not require il when they maze
the contract in February. 1856 ,,-
IL is decided in this case that tne duh hd
must be equally distributed pro ru." ~, ~.
s,rasr ali the creditors, and that the
special partners are not liable as general
partpers' The Court holds that the principle
sha casa NJ McAithur against Chase, 18Th
Grattan. 6s3, settles this case so far as IL is
applicable toit.
COUNSEL IN THE CASE.
The defendants was represented by Mr.. NJ.
NJ. Gillian and Judge Waller X. staples,
and the plaintiffs by Messrs. slater Mon
tague. Coke a. Pickerel, Meredith Cooke
and Il. l.. Montague.