New-York tribune., 1901-02-09
ORDER IN CASTELLANE CASE.
UNTERMYER AGAIN CALLS THE COUNT A
THOROUGH SCAMP

IHOROCGH SCAMP
The debts of the Count and Countess de Cas-
tenane and suits brought against them by creditor.
were the subjects OF decision by Judge Lacoub,
in the United States Circuit Cour, and arguments
before the fun bench Of Appellate Division yes
terday.
suit by Eugene Fischhof against the Countess
Casteiiane ana against George ]. Gould Edwin
Iouid Howard Gould and Helen VI. Gould, as
executors and trustees under the will Of Jay
Gould. was begun in the equity branch OF the
Circuit Court. 1t was brought on behalf Of the
pIaintir and all other creditors OF the Countess
Castellane who might come in and Join the plain
TIN IN this suit. IL was for the benefit OF all
creditors The bill alleges that the Countess owes
In England and France about 2OOOoOOO francs. and
that her income since her fathers death has aver
aged 100000 year.
George j. Gould. Edwin Gould Howard Could
and Helen NJ. Gould executors and trustees
have filed an answer in this suit by their solicitors
ex-Judge John F. Dillon and Charles n Gardiner
Judge Lacombe has just entered an order which
among otner things. provides that the executors
ana trustees are authorized to pay the Countess
Tor the support OF herself and children sum not
TO exceed 100000 year. in equal monthly install
mehts' Ihey are restrained from paying out any
part OF tne trust funds any of the income there
from except as aforesaid to any one. for any pur-
pose. without the further permission and order OF
the Court.
George j. Gould and Helen NJ Gould are an
pointed receivers OF the surplus trust income of
'he countess derived from the trust fund held by
the trustees. They directed to take possession
OF her surplus trust income and apply in from,
uhe 10 time as may be ordered by the Court
toward the payment of the Just and valid debts of
the Countess. including the debt of the plafnttT
IN this suit and of such other creditors of the
countess as may come in and present and prove
the amount of their claims. All creditors of the
Countess enjoined from bringing anv other sutt
IN law or in equity against the Countess and
against the executors and trustees for the COL
lection OF their debts out of the trust fund now
accrued or hereafter TO in the hands of the
trustees The receivers are to serve without com
persation and are directed give bond in the
sum of $4,000.
The executors and trustees are directed to turn
over Immediately to the receivers all the surplus
trust income belonging to the Countess now in their
possession and in the future TO continue to turn
over all surplus trust income so fast as the same
accumulates. The provisions of the order are made
subject to the priority of the Dittmar suit now
pending in the New-York Supreme Court
In the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court
samuel Cntermyer again denounced the Count de
Casteilane, and also the Countess as co-defend-
ant, in his argument for Anton j. Dttnar respond
ent In an appeal from the recent order OF Justice
Beach. limiting the allowance to be paid TO the
Casteanes from the trust fund of the Gould estate
TO a sum of $4,000 annually. The appellants were
ue count de Gastellane. the Countess de CasteIane
Gould. trustees of the Gould estate
Inc appeal grew out of the Wertheimer suit
the of the Gould estate for claims on bills
OF exchange aggregating S326I54 o.
referring 10 George Gould, who, II was said. had
IN his possession two of the pieces sold by
Werthemer 10 the Castellanes for which he had
| paid &6,o0o, Mr.. Untermyer said:
The gentleman who thus recklessly in
FORMATION and belief 10 that answer must have
known from the correspondence and from his fa-
miharlty with the affairs of his sister that for
years Mr. Wertheimer had been renewing these
acceptances upon the oft repeated and as often
broken promises Of this dsCTedited nObleman. who
Is trading upon his title and living upon his wife
money. more aggravated case OF fraud a
colossal scale has never been exposed 1t shows the
de1cndantS TO be scamps thorough lived.
With princely fortune annual income, these
defendants have. without any apparent temptation
to dishonesty, descended methods IN dealing
with their creditors that would arouse the con-
tempt OF the ordinary thief