Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1900-04-27
|L|||P|||R||| Tern FINISHED
) Mn Nary Anderson Granted ! Dt.
Il yoros and 1000 Alinony-
Newman Case

Full Text Of Judge Burnham's Do.
cision IL the Celebrated Good.
rich. Moore Case.
The April term OF the district court
was brought to q close Thursday after
noon and Judge Burnham left for his
home in yinton in the evening. What
yet remains on the calendar unfinished
viii be taken up at the special June
session, which will begin June u. Sew
eral smaller matters were disposed of
Thursday. including the dismissal for
want OF evidence. Of the case against
g. 4. Newman, OF ST. Anthony. Mrs
Mary F. Anderson was granted . di-
vorce from her husband, George II. An
sderson, and was allowed $1,000 alimony,
4 the household goods and the custody Of
Il the two minor children. The defendant
I Is to retain the South Center street
homestead. Alta N. Ferguson was all
lowed 500 temporary alimcny pend
ing the settlement of the action for di-
vorce brought against her husband,
Isaac N. Ferguson.
The full text OF Judge Burnham's de-
clsion In; the Goodrich Moore case, the
disposition of which was mentioned in
these columns Thursday. on account of
Its Importance and the statewide
prominence that the action has gained.
10 given below.
In this case Of j. f. Meeker. admins
traitor of the estate Of w. L. Smith, de-
ceased, against L. B. Goodrich and Lau-
sra A, Goodrich. I have set aside the or
der OF submission at the November term
and made an order that II be decided
at this term.
This case is very important one,
and one in which considerable amount
is involved. and the transactions
brought within the issues extend over a
period of several years. and many of the
transactions were quite intricate and in
volved the handling of a large amount
4 OF money belonging to other parties, and
the commingling OF monies belonging to
the defendant, L. B. Goodrich, with
those OF the decedent, w. u. Smith, and
4 also OF one Peter Cooper, II he had any
interest in them. And 1t has required q
good deal Of examination OF accounts
and notes and OF the general manner in
which the business was transacted. The
main controversy is upon a transaction
which took place between Mr.. Goodrich
and Mr.. Smith. decedent, and Mr.. Coop
er, which was in regard to the giving
Z OF two notes-one OF 100000, in 1858, and
one OF $4,000. in 1889. which, 1t is claim
ed. were given for the purpose ofsevad-
ing taxation, SO that Mr.. Smith ard Mr..
Goodrich might deduct from the monies
and credits of Mr.. Smith sthese4two notes
and thereby reduce his assessments.
Now, when the court has reach
ed solution OF those ques-
tions,s In regard to the bona
dde OF that transaction the case Is prac-
tically decided. It is true there are q
great many other matters connected
with the business Of theee parties. the
manner OF doing the business. the char
acter OF the transaction. the persons
with whom this business was transacted
that necessarily are brought into this
controversy for the purpose OF throwing
light upon the main facts or questions
In this case, and in SO far as these tram
ssactions have illuminated the main
question and have thrown light upon
that question. have considered them
In my examination OF the evidence and
transactions OF these parties. Except
for the peculiar manner in which the
business was done, which was somewhat
unusual, have had very little aid from
those matters-side lights-in arriving
at a Just and fair conclusion, as | view
the case, as to the main transaction be-
tween Smith and Cooper and Goodrich.
Now a great many notes were intro
duced in evidence and kept careful
memoranda OF them as they were intro
duced-loaning OF money collecting OF
notes, renewals. etc. and quite a. book
account in connection with that. Now
fail TO find on examining these matters
and deta!is-these different notes and
Observation-Disclosures the defendant has in
any way misappropriated any of those
funds or converted any of them to his
own use. think the testimony very
clearly shows that where Mr. Goodrich
was loaning the money OF Mr.. Smith,
either from the book account or from
the memoranda connected with the loan
and the transaction-the note and mort
gage. that the history of each one
+ of those transactions can be followed
out and II will show where the money
was loaned, the amount OF interest re-
ceiSed on II, and when the payments
were made. In fact, Just what became OF
it. Now, IL Mr.. Goodrich loaned money
OF HIS own of course that would not ap-
pear in Mr.. Smiths account. and while
these accounts were kept In somewhat
irregular and unbusinesslike way, yet ]
think 1t can be said, when you come to
follow up these transactions, In the light
Of the testimony that was introduced.
respecting each one OF them, that you
can determine to y reasonable certainty
just what was done with the funds In
the hands of Mr.. Goodrich that belonged
TO Mr.. Smith. So. in examining the
books and in examining those transac-
tons can not find that any of the
money that was in the hande OF Mr..
Goodrich-whichi 1t Is conceded was in
his misunderstanding to Mr.. Smith was
many way concerted to his own use or
diverted from the estate into the hands
OF other persons. SO that any Of these
funda that belonged to the estate be-
came lost to It.
Now comes the question az to wheth-
er or not Mr.. Smith. during his lifetime,
f and at the time when these two notes.
one Of SIS, 900 and one OF $50, 900. were
given. as to whether or not that was q
bona fide Indebtedness. Now. taking all
the testimony that was introduced bear
Ing on that point for solution OF that
question-takingsit UP. not quite In its
order, I find that quite q number OF citi-
sens Of State Center, where both re-
Il sided had heard from time to- time