The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1905-01-04
IN INTERESTING CASE.
ORDER FILED IN SUIT AGAINST
j. L. McLAURIN.
Judge Brawley Sustains Certain Para
graphs of Demurrer Entered by
Plaintiffs Counsel.

l.
Plaintiffs Counsel.
After hearing the arguments Of
counsel in the case of the Information
al Trust Company, Of Maryland,
against former Senator John L. Nc
Laurin, suit for judgment in the sum
Of s43,S62.76, Judg Brawley, Of the
United States Court, yesterday passed
| an order sustaining certain para
graphs of the demurrer entered by
plaintiff counsel to the answr Of de-
| fen6ant, unless certain paragraphs Of
defendants answer be amended within
a specified time. Messrs. Lee and Frost
of the firm of Smythe, Lee & Frost,
appeared for the plaintiff, the Interna-
tional Trust Company, and Mr.. c. r
Townsend for the defendant. In the
suit the plaintiff is represented by
smythe, Lee & Frost, and the defend
ant by C.. P. Townsend, T. W. Bou-
schier and Mordecai & Gadsden.
The papers IN the case which art
I Of considerable interest, were filed
in the United States Circuit court here
during the early part Of this year. The
complaint Of the plaintiff. the Inter
national Trust Company, OF Maryland,
alleges that on Or about April %, 1903,
the defendant, for valuable consider
taiion, executed and delivered to the
plaintiff his promissory note, whereby
he obligated himself to pay to the or
der of plaintiff, six months after date,
the sumof $4,000, and pledged as Sc
Icurity for the payment Of said note
certain bonds and stocks. That the
said note was not paid at maturity and
thatethe plaintiff, in accordance with
the provisions OF he note, sold the Sc
curities for the sum of s8,220.36,
which was credited upon the amount
of the note The plaintiff alleges that
by reason of said note and interest
thereon and cost1of protest, after de-
ducting the proceeds Of the sale Of the
securities, there is due the plaintiff
the sum of .s43,s62.z6. Wherefore
plaintiff demands Judgment for that
amount.
| The answer Of the defendant, the
Hon. John L. McLaurin admits the
execution of the note set forth, but
denies that it was for valuable con-
sideration; on the contrary, alleging
that it was without consideration, and
absolutely null and void. Prior to
! April %, 1908. The answer holds, one
Frank A. Umsted entered into an
agreement with the plaintiff for the
loan of $4,000 upon pledge Of col
laterals set out in plaintiffs COM
plant as deposited to and with the said
note for the term of six months, the
said Frank A. Umsted to pay six per
cent interest per annum, and an adj
ditional interest charge Of $4,000, and
a commission of $500 to r. H. Ed
| nonds, then a member Of the board OF
directors of the plaintiff. That for rea-
sons satisfactory to the plaintiff and
! Frank A. Umsted, the answer further
| alleges it was not desired that the
collateral note be made directly IN
| the name of Frank A. Umsted, but
thereafter, on or about April %, 1903,
the defendant, by and through false
and fraudulent representations IN
reference TO the financial condition,
| etc, of the Brunswick and Blrmlns-
ham Railroad and Construction Com
pany and Steel Plant, made to hird by
the international Trust Company,
through one Of its officers r. Il, Ed
/ monds, was induced to execute his
promissory note, in the nature OF a
collateral note, to the order of the
| plaintiff, the same being endorsed by
Frank A. Umsted, and that 1mme-
diately upon receipts Of the proceeds
of the; said note by defendant he paid
over and delivered the same, to wit,
the sum of s44,500, to Frank Umsted.
| On Information and belief the defend
ant further alleges that in the whole
/ transaction It was understood by the
plaintiff and Frank A. UmSted@ that
! the name of the defendant was used
simply for the convenience and pur-
poses Of the plaintiff and Frank A.
Umsted, and that it would be fraud
| upon his rights to hold him liable now
| upon the note. The defendant further
states in his answer, on information
| and belief, that the collaterals attach
ed to the note were purchased or
caused to be purchased by the plain
tiff for its own benefit, and that it
subsequently realized therefrom other
securities sufficient to pay and dis
charge the said note, so that, as a
matter of fact, the defendant holds,
| the plaintiff has long since received
more than full payment and satlsfac-
ton therefor The answer further al
| ileges, among other things usurious in
terest,
To this answer the attorneys for the
plaintiff fled notice Of demurrers, and
+! the arguments yesterday We're on the
| demurrers. After hearing the argu-
ments Judge Brawley signed he fol-