Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 38, Number 35, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 16 January 1906 — MORE McCOY MATTERS DECIDED [ARTICLE]

MORE McCOY MATTERS DECIDED

Referee Bowers made his decision in a number of matters pending before him, last Saturday. Geo. M. Wilcox, of Surrey owed the bank individually, u note for S4OO. The firm of Wilcox & Son owed au overdraft of $l3O. W'lcox individually had on tmrrent~amb time deposits a little over SBOO. and lie asked to be allowed an offset. of the entire S3OO. The referee -de cided that he was entitled to offset the note against S4OO of the deposit but the overdraft ot $430 must be paid to the estate, and he will get back only his per cent.of dividends on the other S4OO of his deposits.

Warner Bros., of Rensselaer, drew a complete blank. They owed the bank, when it busted, an overdraft for about S4OO. Tom. personally, owed them SSOO. He had promised to •credit them the amount he owed them on the books of the bank, which would thus have wiped out their overdraft and left about SIOO coming to them from the bank. Tom did not keep his promise, and the credit was not made. The Warners asked to be allowed a set-ofl of Tom’s debt to them against their overdraft, but the referee decided against the claim. They will, therefore, have to pay their overdraft in full, and get nothing back except their dividends on Tom’S individual estate, which will be only a few cents on the dollar. J. C. Gwin, of Rensselaer, also asked for a set off. When the bank closed he had some S4OO on deposit. He also owed the bank a note| for ss2® McCoys had deposited this note as collateral with the Central Trust Company, of Chicago. Later this note was sent back to the First National Bank of Rensselaer, for collection. Mr. Gwin was under the mistaken belief that this note had been sold absolutely, instead of having only been deposited for collateral, and just a few days before the petition to put the McCoys in bankruptcy was filed, in June 1904, he paid the note. Ha now showed these fact and asked for a retroactive set-off of S4OO of his note against the same amount of his deposit. The referee decided against him, and all he will receive will be his dividend on his deposit. Had he not made the mistake and paid the note, he would have been entitled to the set off. ~

Another complicated case was a claim of Walter V. Porter, against the A. McCoy estate. A little before the bank closed Alfred and Walter entered into a written contract, whereby Alfred was to pay Walter at the rate of one dollar per acre, if Walter would quote a price at wjiich he would either sell his own or buy Uncle Mac’s half of the 516 acres they jointly owned ia Uniontownship. Walter named ithe price all right, and stood ready to carry out the contract, but Uncle Mac had not dug up the $516 when the bank closed. Walter therefore put in his claim for the amount, against Alfred’s estate. It seemed like a good claim, but the Trustee held that it meant a dollar per acre only on each other’s half of the land. The Referee decided. however, that It meant the whole 516 acres, and therefore Mr. Porter will get his dividend on that sum on Uncle Mac’s estate. Nothing positive can be stated , about the next dividends, but good I progress is being made in arrang- ' ing for them, and it is now expect - that another dividend of not to exceed 10 per cent will be paid to the bank creditors by March 1. And of 15 per cent to the A. McCoy credito; s.