The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1904-02-04
THE APPEAL,
DISMISSED.
Tie Federal Circuit Court 81 ,Ap-
spcals Affirn1s Decision III
Important Case,
MANY THOUSANDS INVOLVED
The Lower Court Affirlned-AA
Kindred Case Being Argued.
One Call To-day. y.

TRIO United stntcs Circuit Court Of
Appeals was engaged yesterday. with ar
gument In q cnse Of great Importance
and magnitude. 1T Is printed in o. volun1r
incls record covering over 1900 printed
rnges, aud involves over n quarter of
Il million dollars. IT. Is the case OF
Emanuel W, Bloomlngdnlc, trustee, &C..
and Marcus a. Bettmnn,5e ct al. appel
lants, vs.. Gilbert L.. Watson and Max
Drey. appcllees; from the Circuit Court
mt 9Parkersburg, w. Va
The litigation grow out OF n deed OF
assignment made In New York by the
cop partnership OF Bottmun Watson and
,Bernheimcr, and OF; Bettman aud Wat,
son, which firms were engaged In gener-
al oil business, having an output OF over.
800 barrels a. day, IN tho States of Vir-
Einia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio
and Indiana. Gilbert l.. Watson, ono
of the partners and parties to the deeds
OF assignments claims 10 have been de-
flnuded by said deeds, and applied to the
Circuit Court OF tho United States ut
Farkersburg, VIVA. to set aside the
deeds Of assignments and bc relieved
II ON tho effect OF the assignments, and
praying for a dissolution OF tho partner
ship, and that their assets be- administer
cd and tho rights OF all parties DO prop
erly adjudcated and tho par tnershlps
wound up. Tic lower court found the
deeds OF assignments to be fraudulent.
and, accordingly, set them, aside, and
appointed a receiver and special mas
ter to take charge Of the property and
to state and settle the accounts between
the several parties composing the firms.
and held that the said Watson was
entitled to be relieved Of said debts, and
that the said debts and each of them
were In fraud Of his rights and OF the
rights OF the creditors of said firms,
and that at the time Of the filing OF
complainant's bill he was and now Is
entitled to have the said debts cancelled
as to himself and his said firms t
MOVE, TO DISMISS.
h, Upony the case being called by the court
for argument, counsel for the appellees
filed a motion to dismiss the appeal Of
the "a appellants on the grounds ( thhe
tho citation does not show service OF
Max Drey or any person as his agent.
and that the citation Is not directed or
served upon other necessary and lndls-
ne n sable. parties. and that the appeal was
not taken within six months from the
date OF the final decree as REQUIRED by
the law,
ia, Leo WE'LL Of Pittsburg, Pa, and 3.
Nj Ambler, OF Parkersburg, W.. Va,
argued in support Of the motion, and e.
B, Enslow,t Q E. Huntington,3W. Wa. ar
gued in opposition to the motion.
The court, after hearing the arguments.
took the matter! under consideration un-
til 3 p. N. Upon reconvening, the court
granted the motion and dismissed the
appeal. 8a-.
admitted to practice in this court.
Max, Drey, appellant, VS.. BWomingdaln
et, al. iappellees; appeal from the Circuit
Court at Parkersburg. W. Va THIS
case also grows out Of the same itiga-
ton as No. SILL, argued by counsel viz:
A. Leo We'll, of Pittsburg, Pa, and =.
NJ Amber, Of Parkersburg, w. Va. for
! thc appelIants, and by F.. B. sEnslow, OF
Huntington. W. Va: D. P. Hayes, OF
New. York, and James S. McCluer. Of
Parkersburg. ". Va, for the appellees.
and. pending the argument, the courc
adjourned until this morning Ut 10
o'clock.
are: ~. s.i5
Jesse Rosenthal ct al. appellants, VS..
John T McGraw, receivers, ct al, ap--
nellees: appeal from the Circuit Court at
Fredericksburg. w Va. This case also
grows out Of the litigation in No. 81, TO
be argued by J. ]. Frank, of New ORR x
for the appellants, and by MeiVll1e -
Post of Grafton, ". Va. IA
IDEAL Stopper Company ct al appel
| lants, VS.. the Grown Cork and seal COM +
pany, appellees; appeal from Glrcu.t
| Court. at Baltimorc;s to be argued by
joseph 6. France, Of Baltimore, Md and
J. philip Mauro. OF washington. p. c.
for the appellants, and by John g Rose.
| Of baltimore Nd, and Robert H. Park
|ipson, OF Chicago. i'll, for this appellees.
This is an action brought by the crown
Cork and Seal Company against.the APP
pellants, to prohibit them. from 'hlr'hs-
inr their patent stopper rights. III 81
SARAH WILEY MEMORIAL.
Impressive Ceremony Of Dedica-