Alexander v. Rundle

• Citation: 75 Ill. 85,1874 WL 9194
• Parties: ELIJAH S. ALEXANDERv.DAVID F. RUNDLE.
• Decision Date: 30 September 1874
• Court: Supreme Court of Illinois

75 Ill. 85

1874 WL 9194 (Ill.)

ELIJAH S. ALEXANDER

v.DAVID F. RUNDLE.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

September Term, 1874.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court of Cook county; the Hon. JOHN G. ROGERS, Judge, presiding.

This was an action of trover, brought by appellee, Rundle, against appellant, Alexander, in the circuit court of Cook county for the alleged conversion of a promissory note for $7,000 made by Alexander, payable to Seymour and Rundle one year after date, and dated June 24, 1872. The state of facts upon which the action arose is substantially as follows:

Seymour and Rundle, of Chicago, were interested with others in three several railroad contracts in Wisconsin, two of them for constructing portions of the Wisconsin Central Railroad, and the other one having been made with the Northwestern Railway Company.

The work under the contracts was in the course of execution, and the note in controversy, together with $6,000 in money, was given by Alexander in purchase of Rundle's interest in the contracts. The negotiation took place in Chicago, where Alexander was living, and all his knowledge in relation to the contracts and the condition and value of Rundle's interest was derived from the representations made by Seymour & Rundle. The latter, upon the conclusion of the purchase, at once dissolved their partnership and signed articles of dissolution, to which was appended a statement that the business of the firm would still be continued at 441 Wabash avenue, under the firm name of Mark T. Seymour & Co., composed of M. T. Seymour, Joseph O. Rutter, and appellant, Alexander. On the 5th of July, 1872, Seymour, Rundle and Alexander left Chicago to go to the work. Immediately after arriving at Stevens' Point, Wisconsin, where the head-quarters of the contractors for the work were, in view of the facts which existed there, Alexander demanded of Seymour and Rundle the return of his money and the note he had given, claiming that he had been deceived, and that misrepresentations had been made to him as to the condition of affairs. Seymour and Rundle deferred any action upon the subject until they should get back to Chicago. After their arrival back to Chicago, Alexander applied to one Howard for his aid in the matter, Howard having had at one time some negotiation himself with Seymour and Rundle for the purchase of the same interest, and having been instrumental in getting Alexander into the purchase, by first bringing the subject to his notice. After some previous meetings, Seymour, Rundle, Alexander and Howard met for the last time in regard to the matter July 18, 1872, at the office, 441 Wabash avenue. In the course of the interview Rundle became offended on account of charges made by Alexander, and went away, leaving the note with Seymour, and telling him to do what he had a mind to with it. The result was that the note was placed in an envelope and deposited in a drawer in the safe there, and Alexander was furnished with a key to the drawer. As to the terms and conditions upon which the note was thus deposited, the witnesses do not agree precisely. Afterward, in the absence of all the inmates of the office except a colored boy, Rundle got access to the safe, procured a locksmith to fit a key to the drawer, opened it, and abstracted the note. On its coming to the knowledge of Alexander, he threatened to take legal proceedings against Rundle, when Seymour, on the 14th of September, 1872, offered to go and see Rundle at the Tremont House, and endeavor to obtain the note from him. He did so, and afterward, on the same day, wrote a letter from the Tremont House to Alexander, informing him that he had obtained the note, and if he did not see Alexander to give him the note before four o'clock P. M. of that day, Alexander would find the note in the safe, at 441 Wabash avenue.

Alexander waited for Seymour until after four o'clock, when the latter not coming, Alexander, the same afternoon, went to 441 Wabash avenue, and upon his entering--as he testifies without contradiction--the book-keeper informed him his note was there, and stepped to the...