New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-07-18
TWO FAILURES IN THE CITY.
pEALIRs ~ MILLINERY AND FANCY GOODS sCe-
rlNp-oNE FIRM MAKLs ~ AssIGNMLNT.

rENp-oXE FIRM MAKLs ~ AsslGNMLNT.
At3p.m. Yesterday the house Of Sevall & Erick-
eou iobbcrs IN millinery goods al so. o. Lre4GWdy
announced its suspension. " II Is CO. .ad,, th.'
tie debts of the firm amount To iI"u F"pp,V|J 10
$500 600" SAID prominent hu~lne-, man. " but II
g. difficult to &C., AZ the ac.uai nsui,e ~ present
The firm consisted oI H"I..s 81 I 49,, -, '1i.,
sprra. partner until December 81, 1874. IN the
amount OF $4,000. Including thu special capital,
The amount rlsked in the business V .a 0ZOOOuO.
. We know they have nct made any money during
THE last couple of years, SID P,Ts3R coz He-'t"
with Dun's Mercantile Agency MI iioA, "n' ID
reply TO an inquiry as &" the Gauss "i ne suS-
pens ON said: "Our bank facilities f. Jog. but We
hon, not 10 hc obliged 20 make "a assignment
The firm was formed under lt' present name 'r-
Cemhcr 80 1875, succeeding the LriA OF sew ali
Erickson \ Co., which was o4stiZ'H i'at6I' per ~
lN-5 succeeding TO the iObhn- bus ness 81 tie oid
firm of : A. Berkman & Co. Inc house was never
i'm trouble before and has always stood high lu tic
estimation of tle mercantile community. larry I'D
tie fall of leS3 Scvall a Lrcs SON made e. state
sheet Of June 80. which showed a surplus ol he-
tween > %. 900 AMI SlGGuoO AZ th"i date then
nbnut eight per cent The failure il btous ht about
according 10 Tho statement of a partner IA mousse
that has bad dealings with the him. 10y the unsdt.
factory nature of tuesI"W goods lfaoe, $Au O' !he
difficulty iu ul Thinning accommodating, tlNie DtAS
practically no sale for their paper At this time
Me.>rs. ScwaIl & Erickson are genera partners
also ia the firm OF l.. l.. lloPhlu ms a. o., OF y ,Inr
rrm has been bought from Sowall n Eri'kso vho
were responsible for the goods nulthasc 10y opklu@
Co. i'm their own name. On pecemhcr J. lsS5,
Sewau 4 InDk,Hu's tory, at FlH'Iet,l \. ~,
was burned and they placed their loss at f'O,Oup
and were insured for $4,000.
Julian White Son 4 Co.. commission mcr'hanisi IN
fancy good, OF ''uDtIpns' at No. tG LCouU tt u9ue
an ass gument Yesterday to George q. NHihu1s".
giving preferences for Hl2i3 -. lhcu failure
was directly caused bv that OF Edmund ard lr.. y
Co with whom they had had Intimate relations
ever since theN began business. Their indebtedness
IS estimated AZ Tl5OOpO, aud their assets are be-
levcd 10 be- small. The firm consisted oil Julian
White Ina SON William /. White, and Orrn y.
sac. ir Mir sage SAID toa TMRCNr reporter:
", cDpuot make any estimate " our assete ami Ntn'
tcs a present We mad idc, of This thing uut yc,te
day morning. whom Edmund Yard. Jr, a Co tlr. .udcd
Ne thunglt they very strong We never Questioned
thcr responsibility We did = business VI about
100000 during the past year
Mir Walhndgc said that hc had not had time e.
make an examination. and that Z would ike uuil
The middle of next week 20 examine the books ana
take an account OF stock.
Tha finn il ON the list of preferred creditors Of
Edmund Yard. lI.. ~ CO., who were indebted TO II
Tor much larger sum than that mentioned ON the
list published yesterday. What tins amount Is
could not he asCertaiucd:
Julian White. the head of the house.. commenced
his buSine career in 1856 as partner IN the firm
al Moves Wilson Il White, of No O3 Leonard.st
In 1860 the style of that firm was changed To
Moves White a Co. Ito renamed IN ehdt house
until January 1875, when lie retired and formed
Thomas-At That firm dissolved IN August
1876 when Mr. White commenced tho present busl-
mess a one al No. "a Franklin-st In January, 1851
he admitted his present partner he house claimed
capital of $4,000, all furnished by the senior
partner