The Camden chronicle. (Camden, Tenn.) 1890-current, 1903-09-18
THE BANK REcElVERsHlP.
Surety Company Asks for an Injunction
la the United states Court.

The following is clipped from
Tuesdays Memphis News, which
shows the recent action taken by
the Fidelity and Deposit Company
in the Uuited States Court against
ID. G. Hudson, assignee, and the
creditors of the defunct Camden
Bank and Trust Company:
The Fidelity and Deposit Company Of
Maryland, through its attorneys, Watkins
& Thompson of Camden and Bullock q
Undertake Of Jackson, yesterday filed
papers in the United States circuit court
instituting junction proceedings against
d. g. Hudson, trustee for the delunct
Camden Bank and Trust Co. of Camden,
Tenn, the Bank of Huntington and the
creditors OF the Camden Bank and Trust
Co. to prevent them from instituting in
dividual proceedings against the com
plainant for losses growing out of the al
legged misrepresentation Of over $4,000
assets of the trust company, by d. q.
Hudson, while acting as assignee.
On January "a, 1900, the Camden Bank
and Trust Co. made an assignment and
d. G, Hudson was appointed as assignee.
The Fidelity and Trust Co. of Maryland
became the surety of Hudson in the sum
of $4,000, payable to the State of Ten
nessee. conditioned that Hudson should
faithful V and honestly execute all duties
imposed upon him by law and the deed
of assignment, and that he should make
a complete inventory of all assets of the
d5functinstitution and return to the court
a complete record of the sale of any and
all such assets.
1t is also claimed by the complainant
that the filing of a general creditors bill
in the Chancery court of Benton County,
OH January "a 1900, by Lawrence Lanier,
a creditor OF the trust company, caused
the court to interfere with the authority
vested in Hudson by the deed of assign
ment, to which Hudson as assignee and
all the creditors assented, and the pro-
ceedings were thereafter conducted under
! the orders of the court. Hudson, how
ever, according to allegations, continued
to make all transactions as assignee.
By acting under the title of assignee and
winding up the affairs of the bank under
the proceedings as a general creditors
bill, instead Of the deed of assignment, ii
is alleged that Hudson and the court de.
parted from the directions in the original
assignment, resulting in Hudson being
short in his accounts with the estate il
the sum Of $l3,068 55.
The bill also alleges that Hudson, as
assignee, distributed $29, 64937 of the
! $3.50 6ll.S0 due to the creditors of the
bank, leaving balance due of so ,962. SO
In addition to this there was due in at
torneys' fees about So, $50, making a tota
Indebtedness Of $13, 5l2.53.
The Maryland company prays to be dis
charged from any and all liability as sure
ty for the defendant, d. g. Hudson, upo1
the bond executed by him as assigned
under the assignment, and enjoin am
and all creditors of the Camden Banl
and Trust Co. from in any wise holding
the Fidelity and Deposit Co. of MARYLAND
liable as surety upon said bond 1t also
asks that writs of injunction issue re
straining all parties from bringing an,
J action against the complainant company
We understand the argumentil
the case is set from October 6 t,
II at Memphis. Further develop
ments will not be long delayed.