The daily journal. (Salem, Or.) 1899-1903, 1902-07-31

recommendation whether said claim
should be allowed as general claims
or otherwise.
Second-Object to that part Of the
said report on page 2, as follows:
The claim OF Ladd & Bush. class b.
page 2, $1O,512O9. stands upon the
books Of Gilbert Bros. at the date of
failure s2SO3442; the reduction being
made by the payment OF collateral Sc
cureties and funds upon order Of the
court, upon deposit in the First Ma
tional bank Of Portland, against which
ladd 4 Bush held assignment" for
the reason that the receiver has not
made any recommendation to the court
In respect to said claim, or with re.
spect as to whether the said $1O.512.O9
Is Justly or at all due or owing to the
said claimant.
Thlrd-Obiect TO that part Of the
receivers said report on page 2. as fol.
lows: The claim Of w. NJ Kaiser ct
al page 2, under class B is for $fO1.35: [:
the books Of Gilbert Bros. show due
S569.00; they are composed Of the
claims Of w. NJ Kaiser agent. open
account, 8i5; w. VI. Kaiser. open ac
count, $2585; Angie Kaiser. open ac.
count, $1,000, as per page under the
heading OF class G, and the account OF
Angeline Ryan. open account. $1,000.
These accounts do not agree with the
books OF Gilbert Bros, being less I'm
amount, but doubtless made so by the
payment Of collateral" for the reason
that said receiver has not made any
recommendation with reference to the
correctness Of said account or offered
the court any information as to wheth.
er said account Is correct.
Fifth-Object 10 that part Of the re.
ceiyers said report on page 2 as fol.
lows: The First National bank of
Corvallis, claims $3431.12, page 2; the
books show S333S.7G due them: they
are the holders OF a note Of r. s..
Knight az collateral security No. CS7.
which has been reported To me since
the claim has been filed as paid" for
the reason that the receiver does not
make any recommendation to the court
as 10 how much is Justly due on said
account, or as TO how much the said
note OF p. s. knight held as collateral
security by the said First National
bank was for.
Sixth-Obiect to that part Of the re-
ceiyer's said report on page 2. as fol |
lows: Louise Waite claims Sl75.5O.
page z. the books show $4,000 due
her; the difference perhaps Is in the
fact that she has received proceeds of
a collateral note which she holds"
FOR the reason that the receiver makes
no recommendation az TO what Is Just
y due on said claim, nor as TO wheth
pr said claim Is properly made out. and
also object to the allowance Of said
'laim or any part thereof unless said
claimant shall file an amended claim
showing the amount due her on the
late OF the failure OF said bank. the
nature OF said indebtedness. what col
atoral was held, and how much OF the
Iaid collateral has been collected. with
he Item and date Of collection.
Seventh Object To that part of the
eceiyers report ON page 3. referring
O the claim of Brown a wrightman.
or the reason that the said receiver
makes no recommendation To this
curt with reference to the claim OF
he said Brown a Wrghtman for the
um OF S250000 as attorneys fees In
he case Of Emma Johnson VS. Tilmon
'ord, executor, et al, In the circuit
ourt of the United states. for the
tate of Oregon, or In reference to the
lain of Brown 4 Wrlghtman for the q
um of 100000 as attorneys fees In 3
he case OF A. r. Gilbert and +. n.
Hilbert bankupts. In the district I
nurt OF the United States. for the dis
'ict OF Oregon, or as TO the attorneys
res of said claimants for the sum OF =
100000 In the above entitled cause Il
aid receiver undertakes to recon u
.end 20 this court In his said report
hat he considers an equitable Zee for
le services rendered to said receiver p
temporary receiver and permanent u
'ceiyer but said claimants have pre- ~
.nted no such claim TO this court u
Eight Object 90 that part of the re-. in
'lyers said report ON page 3. refer r'
ng 60 the claim OF Tilmon Ford. Stat Is
3 check, page 4. S7iG32, for the rea ~
m that the claim was filed by MIR CT
ater. as receiver sets out In detail as
q said check. with other checks ~
avn by him, which have not been IN
esented, and shows that the amount
said check was deducted by the pl
Id slater as receiver from his r'
linn. ca
Ninth Object 10 that part OF the re- an
.ver's report ON page 4. referring 10 &c
claim OF r. n. Kirk. sater's check. 'el
se o, S7.6i, for the reason that the Go
II report is not explicit. and makes vi
recommendation In respect to said 'h'
i'm as 60 whether the same Is just or pa
'sonahle, and Tor the further rea wa
CONTINUED ON Third Page7 hl