Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1897-11-19
MUST PAY $4,000.
Decision Against the Brokers
Who Handled Funds

Len to Isaac II. williamson in Trust
for Ills ChiIdreu--- Total SpecuIations
of Nearly Million.
The following article is from the New York
Herald Of Tuesday. Isaac II. williamson has
been resident Of Brlttleboro 1.-THE last three or
four years. The,'daugher Leila was the late
Mrs f. A. Tyler, who was drowned with her hus
ba d in the Connecticut in July, 1896. Mr. vii.
lamson's father, Benz amin williamson was vice
chancellor of New Jersey aud one of the most
noted lawyers in this country. He died in 1892,
leaving an estate of about S1,5)O,0JOl
The stock brokerage firm of Mcintyre
IL Wardwell has been held by Judge An
drews of the supreme court to be response
bic for the losses incurred by Isaac Hal
sted Williamson while he was specializing.
through them, with trust funds. He held
these funds as trustee under the will of his
father, Benjamin Williamson, late chan.
cellor of New Jersey, who died Dec. l,
1892, leaving large fortune. A decision
was handed down yesterday, in which the
court holds that the estate is entitled to re-
cover the securities which Williamson
hypothecated with the brokers.
Chancellor Williamson left three sons
and two daughters By the provisions of
his will he gave the bulk of his property
to his children, leaving the residue in three
shares to his sons, Ben amin, ir, and
Frederick b. williamson and the other
share to his son Isaac H.. in trust for his
two children, Leila and Benjamin, grand
children of the testator. Isaac II. Will
Hanson was appointed trustee of the estate
under his fathers will and shortly after
the death of his father acquired possession
of the property, which consisted largely of
gilt edged securities 1t was not long af-
Lerward that the trustee began to speculate
on margins with the trust funds in his con-
| troll in sugar and wheat through Mcintyre
| ~ Wardwell. His speculations ran up to
almost million dollars. Most of these
| speculations were conducted during the
| years 1894 and 1895, when the brokers, it
is said, made large profits.
| Williamson, in disregard of the conditions
of the trust, "wrongfully and fraudulent
| ly," it is alleged, hypothetical with the
brokers the following securities, although
it was charged they knew it was trust prop
erty and that he had no right to dispose
of it: Seventy shares of New Y ork Central
railroad, 20 shares Central railroad of New
Jersey, l52 shares Delaware and Hudson
Canal company, $50 shares American Coal
company, $50 shares Hackensack Water
company, 10 bonds of the Central railroad
of New Jersey, and 20 shares of the Nation
al State bank of Elizabeth \. j.
When the account between the trustee
and the brokers was closed he was found
to be in their debt for $40 600. As soon
as these facts were brought TO the knowl-
e ige of the family the trustee was remov-
ed from his trust by the courts of New
Jersey, and Theodore C. English, OF Eliza
beth, y. D., was appointed Trustee in his
stead. This was about year ago. In
the meantime the brokers had possession
of the securities, collected whatever divi
dends were due upon them and sold few,
retaining the proceeds.
The new trustee, charging that the
funds of the estate had been dissipated and
wasted with the knowledge of the brokers
made a demand upon them for the securi
ties, and, failing to get them, brought suit
to recover them or their value, and an &C
counting. When the case was tried before
Judge Andrews the brokers denied al
charges of fraud or guilty knowledge OF
their part, simply admitting that the trus
tee had dealt with them in specializing
in stocks on margins.
Judge Andrews states that the brokers
offered no testimony on the trial and tina
no defence To the action on the merits /:
presented, none of the technical defence:
set up being sustainable. He does no
agree with the contention made that the
new trustee is entitled TO recover all com
missions, interest and profits which wer
at any time credited to the account of tn
) former trustee by the brokers, but H.
holds that the new trustee is entitled to re
cover the securities themselves, with an
dividends or interest received by the brok
: ers, or the market value of the securitie
with interest from the time they receve
} them.
He also awards the new trustee costs o
the suIt and an allowance Of $1,000