The herald., 1893-08-26

Dank an 1ne0lvent debtor, was CRk6n up.
The default OF the bank was noted and
the petitioners granted an order declar-
ing the bank an insolvent debtor and
directing schedule and inventory OF its
property to be filed within 10 days.
THE SECURITIES GO TO MR.. STEWART.
The Stewart motion was then ccnsi-
dered and testimony was taken. Mr..
Stewart gave in detail the method
in which he came into possession OF the
securities. Before the closing OF the
doors OF the City bank, he, as manager
OF the clearing house, told Mr.. Childrese
to protect the $4,000 county funds in
the bank if any trouble occurred, and
Mr.. Childress promised to do so.
The morning the crash came Mr..
Childrees sent for him and handed him
the securities in the City bank in the
presence OF three OF the directors, a res
olution just having been passed to do 30.
The object was to protect the county
funds and had nothing to do with the
attempt Of Mr.. Ohildress to get assist
ance from the clearing house.
Mr.. Stewart was borne out by r. G..
Lunt, one OF the directors of the City
bank, and Mr.. LIE Grand Belts. deputy
county treasurer and teller in the City
bank, who said the securities were made
over to Mr.. Stewart to protect the coun-
ty and that purpose alone.
There was good amount of backing
and filling between counsel as the day
wore on, and finally the court, after
hearing brief arguments, decided that
Mr.. Stewart was entitled to have the
securities returned to him, as trustee,
and directed that an order to that effect
be drawn.
This closed the hearing, and the next
thing will be the appointment Of an as
signee of the insolvent concern.
ANOTHER CHILDERss SUIT.
Suit was begun yesterday by James K.
Moflitt against Otto Brodtbeck, A. D.
Childress, w. T. Childress and the Pa
cific Investment company of this city.
The plaintiff alleges that September
6, 1889, the defendants, A, D. Childress
and w. T. Childress, became indebted
to the First National bank of San Fran
cisco in the sum of $25, 900, and executed
their promissory note for that amount
to the bank, payable one day from date.
July 5, 1898, the bank assigned and
transferred the note to plaintiff.
1t is alleged that after contracting the
debt the defendants, A. D. and W. T.
Childress, executed pretended deeds to
the Pacific Improvement company,
transferring to that company large
amount of real estate.
The complaint sets forth that the In.
vestment company WAS organized by the
Childresses with a capital stock OF 500
shares, of which they held 494 shares,
T. E. Gibbon two shares, and w. +.
White, LIE Grand Belts, D. @. Stone and
N. d. Coleman one ehare each. They
were the directors OF the company.
The plaintiff alleges that they were
not bona fde stockholders or directors,
but were only nominally so, for the pur-
pose of carrying out the plans and sub
serving the individual interests OF A. D.
and W. 7. Childress, and were imple-
plements of their wills.
1t is alleged that at the deeds were
executed they included all the assets
and property of A. d. and W. T. Chill
dress that they were in addition to the
debt of 5000, largely indebted to per-
sons and firms, were insolvent and un-
able to pay their debts.
The plaintiff claims that there was q
secret agreement between them and LIE
Grand Bells as secretary, constituting q
majority of the board of directors, that
the pretended deeds should be concealed
from the creditors of the Childresses
and if any creditor attached should be
produced for the purpose OF defeating
him; that they were never in good faith
delivered to the corporation, but that
the delivery WIS., fraudulent and collu-
sivc, and the deeds were ndt Recorded
until July 2;1as9ssyelser t4slevy ol
plaintiffs attRshaheh tdpon Sk6A prop
erty that they MSre made withbut con.
sideration andsswith intent to- hinder,
delay and defssH t&e pladHtif2s as.
signor and otha ersditoss, and prevent
the collection of%their debtss md the
conveyance was inssAect conveyance
to themselysS.
July 22d, thesds sfendant -csinpany exc
cuted deed to Otto Brodtbeck, receiver
of the City bank, to all the property in
trust. August 4th, the defendant recov.
cred judgment against w. T. and A. D.
Childress in the action of Mofitt vs.
Childress, ct al, for 500, ,296 46, the
amount due on the note.
The plaintiff prays judgment that the
deeds mentioned are fraudulent and
( void as against the plaintiff and that
they be set aside and annulled; that the
judgment may be satisfied out of ths
real property described in the deeds,