Year: 1876

suit OF unusual importance TO the commercial por
tion OF tho community, and which has been on trial
for two days past before Judge McAdam and q jury in
Par! oil the Marine Court was concluded yesterday.
Both parties TO tho action were prominent business
men Of the city, and tho case has been fought with
great persistency by Mr. f. p Wilder on the part OF
the plaintiff, and Mr.. Abraham Wakeman. formerly
collector Of this port, tho part of the defendant
The defendant had Jailed anu compromised with his
creditors under the twothrds act Tor ory cents on
the dollar. BY this comprom Sc painliils refused TO
DO bound and sued recover the whole balancc duo
them the ground that the credit gwen defend
false overcstmate and representation DIS TO his
solvency a short time before his assignment These
alleged misrepresentation consisted principally in the
statement that he owed only about $25CUO and had
stock amounting to $s0,000 but which he believed
sgnee found but between $40 QUO and $50 900 In assets
in all and this defendant explained by saying his estl
mate was but a rough one aud that 1t was made IN
good faith and in no sense to deceive that they were
stated in incidental conversations with plaintin ana
not with view obtain credit from hun. they having
had long dealings together and that he was forced to
assignment by some OF his persistent credit
In his charge 10 the jury which was very full,
Judge McAdam told them suit had been
brought by W. II. Cromwell g. ca. to recover from
George l. Burr 6CU 52 Tor goods sold and delivered
by them TO him between September y 1873, and De-
ccmbcr 30 1875 ana that the su had been brought In
the form of aecelt and not simple contract, on
the that the debt had bcen
OF false and extravagant statements made by him, by
which his financial condition was greatly overraed,
and that such representations were made with design
to get possession OF the goods without paying Tor
them. In a long explanation of the law oil CONNER
ciaI misrepresentation the Judge quoted the
opinion OF Judge Pratt in which says
s.ro constitute fraud in such cases there must be
intention cncat at cast there must be intention
do the necessary result Of winch will be 10 cheat
and deiraud another. But is clear that such ntcn.
not necessarily interable from the fact that
in good credit, going on with regular business,
makes his usual purchases for the purpose OF contnu


ing that business after he is made that his prop
erty sufficient to pay his debts. 1t not truud
uent hm to make reasonable efforts to retrieve his
fortune and 10 extricate himself from bis embarrass-
men,s." Judge McAdam concluded as fOllows-''ihis
question tor you determine exclusively. Frard
IS a question of fact Tor the detcrmina-
ton OF jury, and their verdict or
rule Is conclusive upon that question Dispose Of this
as business men, fearessly and without sym
palhy II Tho defendant is guilty It Is your duty TO
convict him by your verdict II he - innoccnt he
ought tree from the mputation OF fraud and II
is your duty find his favor Let justice be vndi-
Gated by your vcrdcl, whatever the consequences
may be to either of the parties


The jury after a hrcf delibcration brought in
dict tor defendant and Lis friends present congratu-


lated him the vndication of his commercial charac.