John Brown, Soldier of Fortune: A CritiqueWilson, Hill Peebles
History
John Brown, Soldier of Fortune: A Critique
Wilson, Hill Peebles
Brown, John, 1800-1859
His failure in business should not of itself count against him, but some
of the methods which he employed to extricate himself from his financial
embarrassment, were of a most fraudulent and criminal character. July
11, 1836, he applied to Heman Oviatt and others, to become security for
him on a note for $6,000 to the Western Reserve Bank. The note was not
paid, and the bank got judgment against the makers in May, 1837. August
2d, the judgment debtors gave a joint judgment bond for the amount of
the judgment against them, payable in sixty days. The bond not being
paid, the bank sued again, and Oviatt had to pay the bank in full. The
nature of the wrong done to Mr. Oviatt by Brown is described by Mr.
Villard on pages 37 and 38. He relates that at the time of this
transaction, Brown had a "penal bond of conveyance," but not the title,
for a piece of property known as "Westlands," which he assigned to
Oviatt, as collateral for Oviatt's having endorsed the judgment bond to
the bank. When the deed to the Westlands property was duly given to
Brown, he recorded it, without notifying Oviatt of this action. Later,
he mortgaged the property to two men, again without the knowledge of
Heman Oviatt. Meanwhile, Daniel G. Gaylord had recovered a judgment
against Brown in another transaction, and to satisfy it caused the sale
of Westlands by the sheriff. By collusion with Brown, the property was
bought in at the sale, by his friend, a former business associate, Amos
P. Chamberlain. Oviatt "brought suit to have the sale of Westlands to
Chamberlain set aside as fraudulent, but the Supreme Court of Ohio held
that Chamberlain had a rightful title, and dismissed the suit. John
Brown himself was not directly sued by Oviatt, being, to use a lawyer's
term, 'legally safe' throughout the entire transaction.... Even after
this lapse of years his action in secretly recording the transfer of the
land, and then mortgaging it, bears an unpleasant aspect."[20]
Meanwhile, the parties to the fraud upon Oviatt quarreled. Brown refused
to give up occupation of the land to Chamberlain; assuming that
Chamberlain had not treated him fairly in the matter; and held
possession of the property, in "a shanty on the place, by force of arms,
until compelled to desist by the sheriff...." Finally, the sheriff
arrested Brown and two sons, John and Owen, who were thereupon placed in
the Akron jail. Chamberlain, having destroyed the shanty which Brown had
occupied, and obtained possession of the land, allowed the case to drop,
and Brown and his sons were released.[21] Mr. Sanborn, on page 55,
disposes of the matter in this way:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account