Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1912-11-29

. In the Circuit Court for Montgomery county.
No. 1889 Equity.
THE OBJECT of this suit is to obtain
decree of the Circuit Court for Mont
: gomery county. as Court of Equity, in
favor of the plaintiff against The Safety
Banking and Trust Company of Philadel-
phia, Pennsylvania, and George r. Macy
of New York city, in the State of New
York, for the sale of certain blocks of land
in a subdivision called "Laytonia," in
Montgomery county, Maryland, for the
purpose Of satisfying an alleged certificate
Of deposit for ST 900, fradulently issued by
the said The Safety Banking and Trust
Company on the 29th day of August A. D.
1911, to the said George X. Macy.
The Bill states in substance as follows,
to-wit
That sometime in the latter part of
January or the first part of February A.
ID. 1912, Harry LamsOn, one of the defend
ants, sold to the plaintiff a certificate of
deposit for ST 900, purporting to have been
deposited by George r. Macy in The Safety
Banking and Trust Company on the 10Th
day of August, A. d. 1911, to the credit
of himself, payable in current funds on re-
turn of the certificate, properly endorsed,
on August, A. d. 1912, with interest at four
certificate is filed with the bill and marked
Exhibit No. /.
That said certificate was endorsed by
the said George R. Macy and delivered
over to some one unknown to the plaintiff,
and it passed by delivery through the
hands of sundry persons without endorse
ments until it was sold and delivered by
said LamsOn to plaintiff, who sent it
through several banks (who are made de-
PENDANTS in the billy for collection and
said certificate was, on the 18th day of
August, A. d. 1912, duly presented to The
Safety Banking and Trust Company for
payment, and was dishonored and duly
protested for nOn-payment.
! That, at the time plaintiff received said
certificate from defendant Lamson, it was
fraudulently represented to the plaintiff
that The Safety Banking and Trust Com
pany had capital of $4,000 and surplus
of 2,000 deposits of $3.50, 900, and loans
of $500, 000 which statement was, in fact, |
false, and plaintiff AYERS the facts to be |
that the said Banking and Trust Company |
at least year prior to the issuance of
said certificate, had been sold out under |
a writ of Fl Fla TO the Keystone Bank of |
Philadelphia for the sum of $50 these facts
were well known to said Macy and to all
of the Banking and Trust Company's off
Gals, who are also made defendants to this
bill.
Plaintiff further AYERS that Macy never
deposited the sum of S., 900 or any other
sum of money or ever put up any money
or property of value with The Safety Bank
ing and Trust Company to support the
issuance of said certificate of deposit, and
that at the time of its issuance The Safety
Banking and Trust Company had no CAPT
tai, no deposits, no loans, no surplus nor
resources whatsoever, all of which the said
Macy and the defendant bank officials,
including George II. Atkinson, the MANAGER
of said bank, very well knew.
That Notwithstanding their knowledge
of said facts The Safety Banking and Trust
Company, through the defendant officials,
issued other certificates of deposits to said
Macy and to other parties to the amount
of $4,000 or $4,000, and unloaded them
upon unsuspecting victims in the various
States of the West and the District of
Columbia, where there was no public record
to furnish the people with information as to
the true financial condition of said Banking
and Trust Company, and plaintiff AYERS
that none of said certificates has ever
been redeemed,
The Bill further states that Macy obtain
MIA, and conveyed 20 of them to The |
Safety Banking and Trust Company for the |
purpose of defrauding the plaintiff and other |
holders of certificates, and to conceal said |
property from his creditors and the credi- |
tors of the said Banking and Trust Com |
pany. Copies of said deeds are filed with |
the bill and marked Exhibits Nos. 2 and 3, |
respectively.
That all of the defendants named in |
the bill are non-residents of the State of |
Maryland, except THE Oak Bank of Balti- |
more" Maryland through which bank the |
said certificate of deposit was sent for
collection.
The Bill prays for the following relief;
1. That The Safety Banking and Trust
Company may be decreed to hold said real
estate as trustee for the benefit of the
plaintiff, to whom said certificate was
fraudulently issued, and for the benefit of
other creditors of the said George r. Macy
and The Safety Banking and Trust Com
pany, to whom were also issued similar
fraudulent certificates, who may come in
and contribute to the expenses Of this suit
2. That the real estate mentioned in the
deeds marked Exhibits Nos. and may
be sold for the payment of the amount due
plaintiff for the alleged certificate of de-
post.
3. That a trustee or trustees may be APP
pointed to make said sale.
a. That the said Macy and The Safety
Banking and Trust Company may be en-
joined from selling, transferring or convey
ing said real estate mentioned in Exhibits
Nos. 2 and 3 of the Bill until the rights of
the plaintiff have been finally determined
5. And for general relief.
1t is thereupon this 23rd day of Novem-
Der, A. D. 1912, ordered by the Circuit Court
for MONTGOMERY County that the plaintiff,
by causing a copy of this order to be in
serted in some newspaper published in said
Montgomery County, once in each of four
successive weeks before the 2Sth day of
December, A. d. 1912. give notice to the
said The Safety Banking and Trust Com
pany of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and
to George r. Macy and George H. Akin
son, residing in the State of New York,
and to Henry F. Atkinson, Edward J. Dom
nelly, Henry L. Rock, Harry j. Colver j. F.
Harrlss, residing in the city of Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania. and to Harry Lamson, Charles
Slater and John G. Slater, residing in the
District of Columbia, all of whom are non
residents of the State of Maryland of the
object and substance of this BILL warning
them to be and appear in this Court. in
person or by solicitor, on or before the 18th
day of January, A. D. 1918, to show cause,
If any they have, why decree ought not
TO be passed as prayed.
JOHN L RRIINFTT CLARK