The Bennington banner. [volume] (Bennington, Vt.) 1858-1894, 1894-03-09
LEGAL NOTICES.
CTATE of Vermont Bennington County. SIS.
y IN CHANCERY.
FANNIE G. STRONG,

WILLIAM r. ALBERTSON,
WHEREAS, Fannie G. Strong of Manchester,
in the County of Bennington and State Of Yer
mont, has filed in the office Of the clerk of the
Court of Chancery within and for the county of
Bennington aforesaid, her oilt of complaint
against Thomas W. Maloney Of Rutland, In the
county of Rutland ana State of Vermont and Will
liam r. AlbertsOn of Worcester, in the county of
Worcester and Commonwealth of Massachusetts
in substance complaining and setting forth in said
That during the year 1883 and prior thereto
The Lyman Strong Company, corporation or
ganized under the laws Of the State Of Ohio, and
having its principal place of business In the city
of Cleveland in said State, was engaged in the
business of buying, selling and working marble;
that it became necessary for said CORPORATION
from time to time to borrow money; that in the
year 1888 its credit was impaired and during that
ear or before il applied TO petitioner to assist it
by lending 1t her name and credit and petitioner
believing said corporation to be solvent con-
scented so to do and on the first day of september,
1888. at the special request of said corporation
solely for its benefit and without any considers
ton for so doing she signed note OF y .24l Al
payable to its order at The Union National Bank.
Cleveland. Ohio, payable four months after date
and delivered the sumo to said corporation. who
received and endorsed it, and as petitioner is in
formed and believes disposed of it to raise money
for its use or to purchase marble or pay its in
debtedness.
That afterwards at the libe special request of
said corporation and solely for It's benefit, without
any consideration for so ooing, said petitioner
signed two other notes payable to itS order. One
of said notes was given for S1.131.l7. dated the
18th day of September, 1888, payable four months
after date at the Union National Bank. Cleveland;
Ohio; the other note was given for 81 42S 6ldated
the oath day of October, 1885, payable two months
after date at the Union National Bank. Cleveland,
Ohio; said notes at time of their respective dates
petitioner delivered to said corporation who en-
dorsed the same suid peti Toner is informed
ana believes, and disposed thereof for its own
benefit. eithtr in purchasing marble raising
money for its business or paying its indebted
ness.
And petitioner therein says that she signed said
notes wholly as an accommodation to said cor
poratOn being in no wise indebted 10 It, but it
was indebted to said petitioner; that she did not
know the legal effects of her acts and that they
implied an Indebtedness on her part, but say that
when she signed them said corporation assured
her she would never be called uDon to pay them.
and promised her 1t would pay and take care of
them when due: and that sad petitioner relied
upon its assurances and promises.
But petitioner further says she now believes
that sad corporal. on procured her to sign said
notes instead of signing them itself and procured
her 10 endorse them that 1t might improve its
credit and more readily use and dispose of them
And petitioner further states that afterwards
and before the 18th day of Februar, 1885, said
three notes came into the hands and possession
Of one William Albertson of the city Of Worces-
Ter in the State of Massachusetts and he then be-
came the holder and owner thereof.
And said bill of complaint further shows that
on or about the 18th day of Febru Try, 1889, and
after said AlhertSon so became the owner and
holder there OF he PLACID sad notes in the hands
of f. NJ. Butler and Thomas w. MalonPy. part
nPrs under the firm name of Hutler & MalDney of
Rutland in lie County of Rutland, attorneys at
law. for collection, and directed them TO sue and
coll c. the same. That upon the 18th day Of Feb
ruAry, 1879 said Butler & Maloney as attorneys
for said AL ,ertsrn, brought suit at law against
said petition up n said three notes and to re-
cover the amount of the same from her. returna
bic at the March Term, 1889, of Ru land County
Court that the writ was duly served aud re-
turned in said Court, aud such proceedings were
had that at the September Term 1889 of laid court
judgment was Obt lined against petit ner thereon
for the sum of 1925 SIS damages, and S29 6j costs
And petitioner further saws that said suit was
brought by SAID Butler & Maluney by drec
ton of the said Albertson and for his benefit. and
said judgment belonged to him and he was the
sole owner leIeof.
And petitioner further says that when sa d ut
Ter & MalOney brought said suit in order that it
migf { l. brought in Rutland County Court, they
brought II in the name of Thomas w. Malonev,
and said Judgment was obtained and now stands
of record in his name.
And petitioner further shows that in the year
1855 said The Lyman Strong Company became
financially embarrassed and all its property in
the state Of Ohio of the value OF $40 0OO and more
passed into the hands of trustee for the benefit OF
The creditors OF said company.
That after its property so passed into the hands
of saiu trustee negotiations were entered int be-
tween said The Lyman Strong Company and
nearly all in amount Of its creditors whereby
compromise affected by the terms OF which
said creditors were paid certain per CEN of their
claims against said company, and such OF said
creditors entering into said compromise in CON
sderation Of said per cent being paid to them and
that the others of said creditors should also re-
lease and discharge their said claims against said
company, and in further consideration that Ma
tilda Shepard, the mother of said petitioner, who
held a large claim against said company secured
by mortgage upon ali its prone ty situated in
said Cleveland released a large amour of Ter
sal 4 clam and surrendered her mortgage security
in order that said company might raise funds
NfaAt ha nUI1fc
paid him or her in flu | payment OF his or her
claim against said company and surrendered,
assigned and released said claim
That the said Albertson at the time of said com
promise held and owned a claim against said The
LYMAN Strong Company of Sl7 300 and interest.
Including said notes upon which said Judgment
had been obtained sai st petitioners tibet in con
sdsration of the sum Of SIS $50 6B to him paid by
suId company and for the further consideration
above expressed released his sa d claim against
said company and against petitioner aud accept
ed the SUN of $50 60 from said company in full
payment of the same both as against petitioner
and said company.
That said Alrerrson at the time h. entered in o
said C mpromise and accepted said sum of 3d.
$50 66 in payment of his claim, well knew that the
debt represented by said notes and judgment was
the debt of The Lyman Strong Company and
that AS between petitioner and said company IL
belonged to said company to pay. and that petit
tioner signed id notes as an accommodation to
said company. aud he received III payment for his
said claim q larger per cent thereon than the I'M
secured creditors OF SAID company Oy reason or
the liability of petitioner to pay said notes and
Judgment rendered thereon.
That The Lyman Strong Company in consid ra-
tion that Albertson should release not only IT, but
petitioner, paid him larger per cent on his
said claim than did its unsecured creditors, as
Albertson W, II knew when he so released his said
claim And the said Matilda Shepard when she
so surrendered ner mortgage security did so that
the said claim against petitioner might be dis
charged as AbprtsOn well knew when he released
his claim against her and said company.
And further showing that wien said compro-
mise settlement was effected L. was carried out
by said creditors entering into it and each of them
including Albertson, assigning their respective
claims with one or two eXceptions), to one Aus
tin Stevens, and he upon such assignment paid
said creditors their per cent of their said claims
which money so paid by him he received of said
trustee who obtained it from the said assets Of
said company. That upon receiving said assign
ment from and paying said per cent to said cred
itors said Stevens receipted said claims in full 10
said Trustee
That said Trustee WAS appointed by the Pro
bate Court in the District of Ohio, court having
jurisdiction in the premises; that said setlt
was effected and carried out by and with IT'S con-
sent and approval.
That pursuant to the terms of said COMPROMISE
settlement said Trustee on the 18th day Of June,
1892 paid TO said Albprtson, through his attor-
new. the sum of s. lSO GO, and he on the same day
by his att orneys executed on his part an assign
ment and discharge in words and figures as fol-
lows viz: Tin consideration of $3.50 GO received
$50 my full satisfaction OF Austin Stevens, here
''by sell, assign and transfer absolutely to said
"Stevens my entire claim against The Lyman
"Srrong Company amounting TO SIP 10 aud int.
land all my rights, titles and interest therein and
n II. all aWN.