The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1916-09-27

property and said John C. Chamber laln merely charged himself the said amount upon his trustee account" Further specific allegation is that although the good will of the busi- ness of Burr & Knapp was of con- siderable value, John c. Chamberlain | made no attempt to dispose of it for the benefit of the creditors, but, in | stead has, in every way in his power, | turned over to The Title Guarantee
 & Trust Co. the good will, and has been so successful in so doing that | The Title Guarantee & Trust Co. is l doing exactly the same character of business and with largely the same | customers, as did the same firm of Burr & Knapp, with the exception l that the banking business has been l mostly eliminated, but the same em- ployes as were employed by said firm | Of Burr & Knapp are now employed by The Title Guarantee & Trust Co.,, and Herbert M. Knapp has his office | with the company and has a great deal to do with the management of I said business, if he is not, in fact, in
 full charge thereof. The application further specifies: The Title Guarantee & Trust Co. has also been used as a medium through which Herbert " Knapp has paid certain pressing creditors who had claims against him personally which claims were alleged to be crim- 1nal in character. Knapp through l The Title Guarantee & Trust Co.,, is 1 said to have paid off some ten or twelve of such claims.
 Trust Co. Stock Sale Another claim for removal is that | while said John c. Chamberlain was | receiver in the state court, about the month of November, 1914, he obtained | court order to sell 1,O06 shares of stock of The Title Guarantee & Trust Company, which stock had been turn | ed over to him by Mary H. Burr, one of the partners in the firm of Burr & Knapp.
 That no attempt was made to pro- cure a proper price and the $1, ,0O6 shares were purchased by Hervey E.
 Burr, as agent for The Title Guaran-
 tee & Trust Company, for the sum of 1 $500 although the real estate records, alone, which were owned by said com pany have been several times claimed
 by John c. Chamberlain to be worth | upwards of $60,000. and are carried | upon the books of The Title Guarantee l &r Trust Company at $42,o0O and al- | though most of said stock has sub- | sequently been sold by The Title Guar antee & Trust Company, for fifty | cents on the dollar,
 Mrs. Knapp Involved Again it is asserted that at the time when the firm of Burr & Knapp was tnsolvent, the firm turned over, with out any consideration therefor, to B. Louise F. Knapp. 990 shares of the stock of The Title Guarantee & Trust Company.
 That these shares of stock are of a value of oyer $20, ,00O and could have been recovered for the estate, but, a1- i though informed of said fact by the petitioners Chamberlain has refused and failed to bring any action to re- covered same from E. Louise Knapp. A further allegation recites that at time when the firm of Burr & Knapp was inso1vent, certain stock was pur-
 chased with its funds and title taken in the name of Hervey E. Burr, with out any confederation and said stock, which is of value of upwards of
 $500, could be recovered for the credi- tors of the estate, but Chamberlain has refused and failed to bring action to recover same from Hervey p. Burr :. The court is again told that ,Septem- Der 10, 1910, Henry G! Ely of New York City, had borrowed certain moneys from Burr & Knapp and had given that firm his premissory note in the sum of 34,0b0.
 That said note was, thereafter pledged by Burr & Knapp with the City National Bank as part of the collateral security to the $5,000 note, endorsed by John 0. Chamberlain.
 H, G, E1y's Note
 That 6h August s1, Henry G, Ely forwarded s150 to said firm of Burr & Knapp with instructions to apply on the note of $450 as part payment;
 That Burr 6 Knapp received the sum of s450, but failed to apply it on said note and used the sum of money fer it's ewH, or their own, use and purposesj
 That oH or about September IT. 1914, Henry G, Ely forwarded to his attorney in Bridgeport sse0 te pay the balance ef said note;
 That his attorney called on Cham beriain and offered to him said pay
 nent and demanded back the said Hetej and thereupon the attorney was informed by said John O. Chamber lain that the note was at the City National bank. The attorney then de- manded that Chamberlain accompany him to the City National bank and Chamberlain did so.
 On arriving at the bank the attor- ney demanded to know if note was there and was informed by the bank officials that it was The note was produced and showed that no en- dorsement was made on it to evil dence payment thereon of said s150 and the officials of the City National bank stated that no payment has been made or offered them by Burr & Knapp or any other person;
 That thereupon the attorney de- manded back the note, explaining the situation and rendering $500, but the City National bank refused to deliver note to him unless the entire amount, 3450, be paid. Thereupon the attor- ney stated to Chamberlain that he would ask for a warrant for the arrest of Herbert M. Knapp, one of the part ners of Burr & Knapp, who conducted the business of said firm. N
 It is alleged that Chamberlain told the bank officials to deliver the note to the attorney for the sum of $39O, and