Answer To The Lant-morgan Levies

Several weeks ago Henry G. Blanchard, then United States marshal for this district, levied upon a number of pieces of real estáte in Washtenaw county, valued at more than $2,000,000, to satisfy a judgement given several years ago in the suit of George Lant, Sr., against Elijah W. Morgan, since deceased. A petition by Otis C. Johnon and Edward D. Kinnie, surviving executors of the last will of Lucy W. S. Morgan, deceased, was filed in this cause in the United States Circuit Count yesterday, asking the court to restrain the United States marshal from levying any execution issued, or which may be issued, on the judgment rendered in that court in the action of Geo. Lant, Sr., on any other property than that described in the return to the writ of attachment, or any other property other than was attached by the marshal by virtue of the writ of attachment, and that the marshal be directed to release and discharge the levy made of any execution as to any other property than that attached by virtue of the writ issued Fejjruary 2, 1891. The petition states that on the last named day an action was commenced by attachment, in which George Lant, Sr., was plaintiff, and Elijah W. Morgan, then living at Ann Arbor, was defendant. On this writ the marshal made a levy on February 13, 1891, on certain parcels of land in Washtenaw county, appraised at $9,416. This writ óf attachment had been issued on an affidavit by Charles R. Whitman, setting forth that the affiant had good reason to believe and did believe that Elijah W. Morgan had disposed of his property with intent to defraud his creditors. This affidavit was made on behalf of George Lant, Sr. Petitioners aver that they had known Mr. Morgan for some years prior to the making of this affidavit, that he had been of feeble mind, and that, on April 5, 1889, he had been adjudged incompetent by the probate judge of Washtenaw county, remaining under guardianship until his death, January 28, 1892. The action of attachment, above referred to, was based upon a judgment for $3,882.72, rendered by the Washtenaw circuit court on July 12, 1881. After Mr. Morgan's death Charles H. Manly was appointed administrator. The case was tried, and on June 2, 1893, judgment was rendered against Manly, as administrator, for 88,637.61. ■ The petitioners charge that Manly was appointed administrator entirely at the instance of Lant; that he had been in the employment of Lant, and had been regularly paid for his services in this cause and for assisting Lant to prosecute his pretended claim against the Morgan estáte. The petition states that on August 5, 1893, an execution was issued which was returned as unsatisfied by the marshal on August 25. On Februaay 24, 1894, an alias execution was issued, which is now in the hands of the United Scates marshal. It is further shown that the marshal has levied this execution on a vast amount of property in Washtenaw county, said to be worth at least $2,000,000, and that it had been made at the instance of the attorney and counsel for Lant, and under the direction of Wilfred Eames, a nephew of Lant, who actively represents him in the litigation. Petitioners show that all these parties, except the marshal, knew that the lands levied upon had not been owned, or claimed to be owned, by E. W. Morgan. They aver that the title to none of this property has been in the name of Morgan since 1875, an and that the levy was caused by Lant, his counsel and Eames, with the purpose of incumbering and clouding the title to all this property. The petitioners further allege that Lant and his attorneys for a long time past had been doing all they could to embarrass the estáte of Lucy V. S. Morgan, the deceased widow or E. W. Morgan, thereby hoping to tire the petitioners by such litigation and embarrassment and cause them to pay to Lant his judgment for the sake of avoiding further litigation. They charge that this last levy was maücious, excessive and illegal in intent and purpose; that they have examined the titles to a number of pieces of the property levied upon, and found that in most instances, and, in fact, nearly every instance, there was no semblance of a title in Morgan, or Manlv, as administrator. They found that the present owners-had held quiet possession for many years, in some cases as long as thirty and forty years, and that furthermore, some of these pieces of property had an assessed value of twice and three times the amount of the judgment, showing, as they allege, that the levy upon so many pieces of land was malicious. The petitioners state that as executors of the estáte of Lucy W. S. Morgan they are owners in fee of a large number of pieces of property levied upon, and that they have demanded in writing of the marshal to release the levy, particularly on all such property not included in the writ of attachment issued in this cause, but that they are informed by the marshal that Lant's attorneys refuse to release any part of the levy made. They show that by the clouding of the title to the property belonging to the estáte the management of the latter is greatly embarrassed; that thereby the sale of property is prevented and the estáte much injured. It is also shown that the levy has seriously embarrassed the other property levied upon, not belonging to the estáte, and that the owners of the property, being so numerous, are without remedy except by individual suits, which would be exceedingly numerous and prove expensive litigation to all the owners of the property. Johnson and Kinne's solicitors are Bowen, Douglas & Whiting, of this