Sequestration proceedings.
We have obtained an abstract of yesterday's proceedings in the
Confederate States District Court which will repay perusal.
The Confederate States Farant.--The petition in this that
James A. Woods,
John Henry and
George W. Farant, were merchants and partners, carrying on business in the
City of Norfolk; and that Woods and
Lowry are alien enemies; and it prays that the interest of the aliens in the partnership property may be sequestered and disposed of according to law. The receiver as for instructions from the
Court as to the way in which the debts due the are to be collected, and the personal by whom they are to be received.--In this case
Judge Halyburton yesterday delivered an elaborate opinion.
In cases of partnership, like that before the
Court (he said) the Sequestration act designs to sequest the interest of the alien enemy only in the partnership property and the question in how that end is to be accomplished.
On the
Bared Judge quoted the 19th section of the act of Congress, relative to separating the interest of the alien enemy and its sequestration, and to effect this, (he ) there are two modes of proceeding.
The Receiver might sue the home partner for an account, and also each debtor of the firm for the debt due by last and the creditors of the firm might file their claims in Court against the firm and the balance after the payment of the debts might be distributed among the parties or the home partner might be allowed to collect the money due to the firm and dispose of the property belonging to it, and pay all claims against it; and after a settlement of his accounts before a commissioner of the
Court pay into the hands of the Receiver the share of the foreign partner.--Where the home partner is a trustworthy and competent person, the latter would be by far the most convenient and best mode of proceeding.
The
Judge quoted from various statue to sustain his position, and concluded by expressing the opinion that while either of the two modes of proceeding above interest may be adopted, the
Court, in desiring the course to be taken in any particular case, should be governed by the of that case.
The
Court also yesterday announced a serious of instructions in relation to matters suggested by
Thomas T. Giles, Receiver, in the report in regard to property in
Fairfax county.
We subjoin a synopsis.
The property should be taken possession of by the Receiver for that district, and under his control, as soon as possible; and if there is no other mode of obtaining it, he should file a petition immediately against those who have it. As to the care and labor bestowed upon it by
W. Thomas, he ought to receive a reasonable compensation, to be paid either from the profits of the estate or out of the general Sequestration fund in Court.
The Receiver cannot, however, safely pay anything until it is ascertained by the
Court, or a commissioner, what amount of compensation should be allowed for his trouble; that is to say, if the Receiver could make such payment without such previous order he will have to run the risk of its being disallowed in the settlement of his account.
The opinion of the
Judge is, that the Receiver may be allowed reasonable compensation for any expended in the preservation of the property and for his services.
2d.
If or live stock of any kind in his possession, he may be allowed the expense of and taking care of the same, 3d.
If on the estate in land and negroes is under his content he have employ an great or overseer; that is to say if a profit might be made by it, or it is were necessary in order to preserve the property.
If more profitable to hire out the land and slaves and cultivate the farm, he may adopt the course most advantageous to the holders of the property.
In a supplement to his instructions the
Judge quotes from
Daniel factory Practice, vol. 3, page 1986, and other authorities, in illustration of the position assumed.
