Appeal from the Circuit Court of Stephenson County; the Hon. Benjamin B. Sheldon, Judge, presiding.

On the 4th day of November, 1857, John K. Brewster made an assignment of his property, for the benefit of creditors, to Daniel S. Brewster and John A. Clark. The peculiar features of the assignment upon which the controversy arises in this case are presented in the following portion of that instrument:

“ That the said party of the second part shall take possession of all and singular, the lands, tenements and hereditaments, and all other property hereby assigned, or intended so to be, and sell and dispose of the same, either at public or private sale, to such person or persons, for such prices, and on such terms and conditions, and either for cash or upon credit, as, in their judgment, may appear best and most for the interest of the parties concerned.”

On the 27th day of January following, the parties amended this assignment by an instrument as follows:

“Whereas, John K. Brewster, on the 4th day of Ro.vember, 1856, made an assignment of that date to Daniel S. Brewster and John A. Clark for the benefit of creditors, reference to which is hereby had for particulars relative to the same. And whereas, power is given in and by said assignment to said Daniel S. Brewster and John A. Clark to sell certain property therein mentioned, upon a credit, if they shall see fit. And whereas, the said power has not been exercised: Row, therefore, for the purpose of removing any and all objections to said assignment, on account of the said power therein contained, it is hereby agreed that all powers of sale upon credit in said assignment contained, are canceled and annulled, and said assignment shall stand as if no such power was therein contained.

“ In witness whereof, we have hereunto set our hands and seals, this 27th day of January, 1858.

“ JOHR K. BREWSTER, [l. s.]

“ JOHR A. CLARK, [l. s.]

“ DARL. S. BREWSTER, [l. s.]”

After this amendment was made to the original assignment, on the 30th day of April, 1858, William P. Pierce and others exhibited their bill in chancery, in the court below, against the parties to the assignment together with certain creditors of the assignor, alleging that the complainants had previously obtained a judgment against John K.. Brewster, in the Circuit Court of the United States for the ¡Northern District of Illinois, for $594.37, upon which an execution had been issued and returned wholly unsatisfied. The bill set out the original assignment, insisting it was fraudulent and void as to creditors by reason of the character of the powers conferred therein upon the assignees, and asked that it be set aside, and the property applied to the satisfaction of the complainants’ judgment.

The defendants set - up the amendment to the original assignment, taking away the power in the assignees to sell the property assigned upon a credit, insisting that by the amendment, the assignment was purged of its fraudulent features.

…

Citation profile

Relationships

How this case has been treated — in progress