The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1896-08-16
IS IN FAVOR OF THE HEIRS.
MASTERS REPORT FILED IN THE
FAMOUS LAWN CASE.

Prior Lien on Nearly Everything
I'm the Hands of the Receiver of
the LAWN Estafe-LittIe Left But
Judgments for the Creditors of the
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. May he Made
TO the Report, and the Fight VIII
Then Go on Before the Superior
COurt-The Superior Court Adj
jOurns for the Term.
Special Master William L. Gignilliat, In
the famous LAWN case, filed his report to
the superior court yesterday, along with
a report OF the evidence taken at the diff
fcrent hearings before the master. The re-
port and evidence form a YoluminOus rec
ord.
This litigation has been pending since
December. 1892. and was brought by Kate
G. LAWN and others. including the minor
heirs of Mr.. LAWN, against james P.
LAWN, executor. and others to recover from
the business known as NJ. LAWNS estate.
which was carried on by the executor, GER
tain sums and property belonging 10 the
minor heirs which had been put into the
business against the provisions Of the
will
The defense was really made by the cred
itors of NJ. LAWNS estate who had
claims against the money and property
in the hands Of the receiver, amounting
to about 2S5,0OO, while the fund in the re-
ceiver's possession was originally only
about $1,000 This has been considerably
reduced from time to time, however, by
payments made to attorneys, to the minor
heirs, and to the receiver on orders from
the court.
over half the Savannah bar is of record
In the case. The plaintiffs, Kate G. LAWN
and minor heirs were first represented by
Edward S. Elliott, Esq, and latterly by
Messrs. Nicolson & Mcclellan. On the
other side the creditors nave been repre-
sented variously by Messrs. Garrard, Mel
dTim & Newman, Denmark & Adams, Err
win, duBignOn & Chisholm, Harden, West
g. McLaws, Saussy & Saussy, Charlton,
Mackan & Anderson, Seabrook & Morgan,
Lester & Ravenel r. r. Richards, A. 9.
Wright, W. c. Hal ridge, J. 5. Sehely,
Wilson & Rogers, OConnor q O'Byrne,
T. d. Rockwell and George w. Owens.
The fact that the masters report has
gone to the court does not signify that the
litigation il approaching its end, and the
fight, If there is to be one, will be in open
court before Judge Falligant AS the mas
ter virtually decides all points in the case
in favor of the plaintiffs, the heirs OF NJ.
LAWN, it may be that counsel for the
other side will file exceptions to the re-
port. and the fight will then come on their
claims.
The fight was over the distribution Of
the fund in the hands OF the receiver,
erty, which was used in the business.
The special master decided In the first
place that under the provisions or the
will of NJ. LAWN, though it directed the
business to be carried on, that none of the
real estate left under the will was TO be
chargeable with any of its Indebtedness.
This decision gives the real estate to the
In the next place he decided that a GER
tain brick store built on the proceeds
from other real estate was a part OF the
real estate, as contemplated under the
will, and should go 70 the heirs. he de-
cided also that the heirs were entitled
to the trust funds in the hands of the
executor representing the life Insurance.
coming to them, which was used by the
executor in the business. This amounts
to SO, SS0.92, with interest from Jan. o. 1883,
and is to come out of the fund now In
the hands of the receiver.
All of the creditors, with certain ex-
ceptions named in the report, whose
claims amount to about $4,000, were given
judgments under the report, but as these
are to follow the prior liens of the minors,
little, If anything will be left for them.
In addition to the foregoing interven-
tons, a special ruling was made on an In
terVention filed by the heirs OF Edward
Cranston, claiming that the estate was
indebted to them in the sum of 1876
with interest from June z, 1876, on account
of NJ. Levin having been on the admins
traitors bond of NJ. j. Ford, who, 1t Is
claimed, never settled with Criah Gran
]
Cranston. This claim was against the
whole estate, and would have bound per-
sonalty and realty alike If allowed. The
master refused to allow II, because IL
was not shown that any distinct amount
was due, or if it was, that the admins
traitor had ever assented to 1t, or that II
he had. that any demand had ever been
made upon him for settlement within the
time allowed by law.
The Intervention of Edward S. Elliott,
Esq, as former attorney for the plain
tiffs for $500 additional compensation, was
passed upon favorably by the master.
The final arguments were made before
the master, March 6, 1896, but there have
been additional hearings from time to time
since then, which prevented the paper be-
ing prepared earlier. These arguments
were made by Messrs. Nicolson and Nc
Kethan for the plaintiffs, and Messrs.
Kenan and Hartridge for the Cranston in
terVenorS The case will now go before
Judge Falligant and there will no doubt be
further confessions before the matter has
been finally disposed Of
Alexander A Lawrence, Esq, took the
oath of Office before Judge Faligant yes
terday to the effect that he would faith
fully and impartially dicharge to the best
of his ability the duties imposed upon him
by the court as county registrar. The oath
was ordered recorded on the minutes of
the court. Mr.. Lawrence is the new men,
Der of the board of registrars, the other
members of which are Messrs. w. p.
Bailey and T. f. johnson.
In the case of Augusta Kaiser for her
self, and Stella Cope and John T. Kaiser,
minors, by their newt friend, James c. Cope,
against Julia Cleary, for the annulment
of deeds to certain property made by ia
cob Kaiser, deceased, and for injunction
and relief, a consent order was taken pro-
viding that the case may be tried and dis
posed of at the December term, and in
the meantime the temporary restraining
order prohibiting the defendant from dis
posing OF, or in any way encumbering the
property, is to stand. Messrs. Kenan and
Hartridge appeared for the plaintiffs, and
Messrs.- O'Connor & O'Byrne for the de-
PENDANTS.
A motion for new trial was filed in the
case of Amelia Monroe against the Savan-
nah, Florida and Western Railway Com
pany, in which the plaintiff was given a
verdict for SIS damages for the loss of a
cow
In the case of w. P. Parker against 81.
j. Armand, in which a verdict in the
plaintiffs favor for $65 % was rendered
the court dismissed a motion to reopen the
judgment, and passed an order taxing the