Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1892-03-24

iHS NlivMlnE were plSseu WITHOUT
opposition Pauline Aschenbach, No.
207 West Second street; Bernard Carr,
northeast corner of Water and King
street; Edward X. Corson, northeast
corner of Front and Washington streets;
James Deency, southwest corner of Sew
enth avenue and Duncan street; Charles
Fehrenbach, northwest corner of Fourth
and French streets; John Il. Ford, No.
l05 Shipley street; John NJ. Gropp, No.
l05 Market street; Frank IIuck, north
east corner of Sixth and Madison streets;
Joseph Hendel, No 3l5 East Seventh
street. William j. IIaggerty, northwest
corner of Front and Jefferson streets;
Harry Kienle, No. 1906 East Third street;
John Mealey, No. 205 Market street;
Patrick Mulrooney, northwest corner Of
Chestnut and Van Buren streets; John
j.. Mullen, southwest corner of Sixth
and Shiplcy streets; Michael Mccarthy,
No. LOG Market street; William ].
Mclaughlin, No. 429 West Second
street; Michael MCCLELLAN, southwest
corner of Fourth and Scott streets;
James O'Neill, No. 1901 Lancaster
avcnnc; Il. Fred Ortip, No. Cos French
street; Philip G. Plunkett, No. 200 West
Front street, Charles G. Rex, No. s East
Second street; John X. Franck, north
west corner of Water and French streets;
Joseph S. Goodwin, New Castle; James
B. Toner, New Castle.
When Thursday mornings session
OF superior court convened at 10 o'clock,
Lewis G. Nandegrift and Benjamin
Nields, presented the petition of William
Helmrath, an execution creditor OF the
Charles Mullen Company, asking for an
order that his claim be paid out of the
money now in the hands of The court,
which was realized at the sheriif's sale.
Charles b. Lore and Willard Sauls-
bury, Jr., who represent the other
judgment creditors, opposed the motion
on The ground that their judgments were
obtained prior to that of Helmrath and
also that he is in contempt of court by
buying goods at the sale, for which he
has refused to pay.
The sale realized nearly $4,000, but
after the commissions and other ex-
penses were paid there was but 81 ,360.67
left, which the sheriff at first thought of
distributing among the creditors, but
upon finding that there would be con-
tention, petitioned the court to be
biNPhtN w IAb wv iiAphNl III ITO 1uobOQ1 :
and the petition was granted.
Mr.. salisbury presented TO the court
the petition of Browning Brothers, ask
ing that their claim of Si4242 with
costs and interest, from May, 1891, be
given the preference as their judgment
was prior to that of the other creditors.
Mr.. salisbury also stated that he and
his colleague represented all the
creditors except the one represented by
Messrs. Nields and Vandegrift, and that
If their claims are allowed it will take
all to money in the hands of the court
to satisfy them.
In answer to the court Mr.. Lore said
that his claim was for 1,19387, with
interest from May, 1891.
Mr.. Vandegrift stated that in an ami
cable action Judgment was confessed by
Charles Mullen for $4,000, in favor Of
Sarah Mullen, and this, he claimed, was
fraudulent and should be set aside by
the court, as there can be no doubt but
what il was done for the purpose of de-
frauding the other creditors.
He cited number of authorities, and
argued in support of his petition and in
favor Of setting the Judgment of Sarah
Mullen aside. Mr.. Nandegrift spoke
until O'Clock, when the usual recess
was taken.
Mr.. Nandegrift resumed his argument
in favor of the petition of William
Helmrath rs soon as court convened al
2.30 O'Clock Thursday afternoon. After
speaking for 15 minutes, he closed by
asking that he be allowed to produce
testimony to show the justice of Mr.
| ~ - lnt Al Ia,
ment obtained by Sarah j. Mullir
against the Charles Mullln Company
was fraudulent and should not be
allowed to stand.
Judge Cullen SAID he was willing t
hear the case in any way that counse
might determine, and that he woult
| give them all the time they wanted, u
it was one of the most interesting case
he had ever heard.
Mr.. Salisbury said he was prepared
to meet the case in any way that nigh
be determined upon, but he would con
tend that there lad been no fraud prac
ticed, and that an insolvent debtor ha.
the right to prefer any creditors he ma.
choose
Mr.. salisbury also asked the court, i
there is to be any further delay, tina
William lIelmrath be required to fur
nsh security to protect the other credit
tors from further loss. lie said tina
when this litigation was commenced il
the United States court the property o
the Charles Mullin Company was yaluet
AT 100000, but that after it came int,
the hands Of the sheriff it shrunk {,
$4,000 Of which little over $1,000 j
left lie therefore thought his client
should be protected against any furthe
shrinkage or loss.
This was also favored by Mr.. Lore
who claimed that while he and his col
league, Mr.. salisbury, were ready AM
willing to try the case in any way, tn
other side were only seeking for furthe
delay.
The argument was continued all tn
afternoon and when the court diourne
il was until 10 O'Clock Friday morning.
Thursdays session of the sunerit
court convened at 10 o'clock.
In the case of the Charles Mullin Com
many. the court declined to hear furthe
argument and decided to hear testimon
either before the court or jury at til
Nav term. The motion of Mr.. Saulbur
to require William Helmrath to furnis
security to protect the other judgncl
creditors from further loss was denied.
j. II. Hoffcckcr attorney for the di
fendant in the case of Cook VS.. the Wi
mington Uity Electric Company, submitte
his reasons for 4 new trial, the most impol
/ tant of which were:
That the verdict was contrary to the ev
dence.
That the court erred in refusing TO adm
testimony in reference to the plaintiff
character and habits.
That the damages awarded are execssiy
I and far beyond the injuries sustained b
the plaintiil.
i That the court erred in admitting test
mony in regard TO u horse being killed b