The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1893-02-08
THE CITY BEING SUED.
IRIS ALLEGED THAT WOODBRIDGE
GAVB WRoNG AUTHORITY.
~. Case VIII he Heard In the United
state. Court-wiiiism L. Trent is the
plainufr-Intercst Manifested.

Suit has been brought in the United
e,otcs Circuit Court by William Il. Trent.
III sewanee. Tennessee, against the city
~ Richmond. Martha A. Woodbridge. ad-
,,inistra6ix Of George n. Woodbridge.
aid Lucy c. Trent. to recover the sum
~ $50. the value OF certain bonds with
premiums
Tho bill AYERS in substance as follows:
william L. Trent. of Sewanee. Tenn,
,rines this bill against the city OF Rich
rnond. and a citizen OF the State Of Vir-
c.ria Martha a. Woodbridge, admins
,~sfrix OF George y. WOODBRIDGE. de-
ceased. and Lucy c. Trent. of Richmond.
Va.
And thereupon your orator complains
that on the 18th day OF June, 1913. the
late Pctcrheld Trent. OF Richmond, united
A. a deed OF conveyance with his wife
Lucy G.. Trent. to George n. Woodbridge
IT.. trustee. by which he settled certain
raj estate and the proceeds Of any sale
az said property on his said wife and her
children. a certified copy OF which deed
IS herewith filed; your orator is her only
child. that on June 2S 1881 q portion Of
fhe real estate. upon the written request
O. Lucy C.. Trent attested by one repu-
table witness. was sold and conveyed TO
The city Of Richmond for $1,000. as fully
s.pcars by a certified copy OF said decd
herewith filed: that this was the only way
IN which the said trust could be disposed
az lawfully; that a part of II had been
81 conveyed 10 the Gesangverein Virginia
rrior 10 this time; that George n. Wood
ir.lge. trustee. was directed to 're-invest
The proceeds as by the said deed direct
ei.' 10 be held by him under the same
trusts and for the same purposes as set
forth in said deed and that. in accord
snce with said direction, he invested a
portion OF the proceeds arising from the
sales in the house and lot No. 2O5 east
Main street Richmond Va. now occu-
rIeI rs a dwelling house by Lucy G. Trent.
and the balance in registered per cent.
bonds Of the city OF Richmond, all OF
which were registered on the books of
fne city and on the face Of the bonds
i1 the name Of George n. Woodbridge,
trustee for Lucy G. Trent and son. that
10 the same time certain other bonds were
purchased from the city in the same name
md registered in the same manner, with
a part of the proceeds Of the sales Of
the real estate by the trustee, and that
two Of them were sold by direction OF
Lucy c. Trent; that on June 30, 1884, the
said George y. Woodbridge, trustee fer
Lucy c. Trent and son, gave a power OF
7ttorney to one c. Sutton who your ora
nr Warren & Quarles. a firm Of stock
brokers' OF the city of Richmond; that on
The 5th day Of July, 1884, G. Sutton took
ne power TO the office Of the Auditor OF
the city, that being the only place at
which a transfer by the terms OF the
bonds could be made, and had the bonds
% the extent OF $500 cancelled and new
bonds issued in their stead to a number
u persons whose names are unknown TO
q
was signed George n. Woodbridge, trus-
tee for Lucy G. Trent and son." that
said city, In gross violation of its law
fm duty voluntarily imposed. al
lowed said transfer TO be made. although
said Woodbridge had no authority to
make It. and was at the same time using
the proceeds Of the sale TO satisfy debts;
that some time afterwards the firm Of
Warren & Quarles was dissolved, and w.
r. Quarles continued to do business as
broker in his own name, until his failure
hopelessly insolvent; that since that time
w. r. Quarles has departed this life. 50
that while in law his estate is doubtless
liable: in fact, there can be no recovery
but the loss will fall wholly upon your
orator and the said Lucy c.
Trent. unless the city, which
is primarily liable. and caused the loss
by making the unauthorized transfer of
the registered bonds, is held responsible
for its unWarrantcd breach or lis pam
duty. hich it voluntarily assumed, when
il issued the bonds to George n. Wood
bridge. trustee for Lucy G. Trent and son,
by which IL had notice of the trust and
was bound 10 refuse to make a transfer
except upon the written request of Lucy
G. Trent, as IL had done when IL became
the purchaser of the trust property under
the original deed; that while this breach
OF trust was completed on the 5th day of
July. 1854 your orator had no knowledge
OF II. nor did the said Lucy c. Trent until
several days after the said George n.
Woodbridge departed this life on Deem
Der r. 1892, because up to that time he
had regularly paid on the LIST day of jan
uary and the LIST day Of July each year, TO
her the interest on $500 OF Richmond
city per cent. bonds less certain taxes
due the state Of Virginia, exactly as IL lie
We're still the holder Of said bonds. which
lad. in fact, passed out Of his hands on
me 5th Of July, 1884, as hereinbefore
stated.
Martha A. Woodbridge. Administrative,
las in her hands the sum of $500 upon
80 hich sum, under the laws of the State
= Virginia, your orator and Lucy c.
Trent have prior claim to all other cred
itors. as they are persons under disa-
h.ity not yet having the right to demand
the coupons from the trust estate from
their trustee, even IL he were living"
SIR. = 5. L. Patteson is counsel for the
plaintiffs.
The case has not yet been set for trial.