Sugar Cases Again

In the attaehmejit Witte of Wm. H. Cottrell iund James U. Itobertson, fcnd also of ftihe Electric Sugar Eefining Co., against the property of 'Olive E. Fi-ieiMl, brought before Circuit Coui-t Commissioner 'McKernan, last -week, he deeided to dissolve tho attachment, aendülg an opinión in the following wordw: "The attaclunent mentioned in thta ïpplication to dissolve the same, sets forth three reaeone eerving the tfáid attaflmicnt -vrite. "1. That the (Undant had alv eocmded, to the tnjury of her ereditors. ■'2. That she had assigned, flispoaed of, or concealed her property wiih intent to deñ-aud her ereditors. "3. That she frauduleotly contraeted the debt. "It appears to me f rom the evidence that tlit' plaintiffs, befare the attachment uit was commenoed, made no claim against the delejidant of any ïiulebtedness ■whatever, and that she was not ttwaie of any such indebtediiess. lt further appears from the evidence given before lne, .that she did iiot abscond, nar intend to abscond, to the injury of lier croditors, but that she. left the state íor a brief time, by adviee of hor attorney, to avoid being arrested and taken to the state oí New York by virtue of a criminal iwocess. lt has been proven clearly to my ïnind tliat she had not assigned, disposed of, nar concealed lier property with ntent to defraud lier creditors, and that the chattel mortgage of $1,500 given to Hatetead, and tlie ome given to Sawyer for $1,000, were given to secure an honest indebtedii.ss, as I think she had a right to do der lew. AVitli rogard to the $4,000 real estáte mortgage running to Mr. Barrhnan, vhich was recorded and no consideraron paid ior the same, it appears to me from the evldence' to be wa hannest endeavar to ratee noroey for legitímate purposes ander & ■wrtttien ani-ccinent wlth Mr. Hartriman that he wouW adyance the umoiint f. aftor Investígatlon, the security proved eatisfactoi y, and not with the intontion oí defrauding anyone. And, lastly, the objection that the property had been receipted and ia ttow in the possession of the defenda.nt, and thcreíore ousts the commisRioner of jurisdiction, in my opinión ís not wíl taixm and la not such a elease as is contemplated by the statute which provides that the sheriff shall take a boad, etc. It is therefore ordered that the said attachment suit Ir. dissolved." Hon. Chas. R. Whittoan, attorney or Cottrell and the Sugar Co., has appealed from this decisión to the ciruit court. Washington Bench Show-Snpreme Court Judges.