National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1884-09-18
BANKER souIER,s PARTNER.


uOuuN anu WIN Try W ETONc ~.
In the equity cause of Theron c. Crawford
and others against j. II. Squier 81 Co.. the com.
plaiunnts, by permission Of the court, have
l:od an amended bill through their attorneys
Mcssrs Cook and Cole, making Commissioner
J. b. Edmonds. party defendant. Commits.
| siOpcr Edmonds had filed n petition claiming
to be the owner of u large part Of the alleged
assets of the firm of Sqi'Cr ~ Co., and by an
| order of tho court was permitted to take pos
| session Of sundry vouchers and securities and
| 4 safe, upon giving bond for their forthcoming
! in answer to any future order of tile court.
In the amended bill the complninnnts
charge upon information aud belief that dur.
ing the last tow months that Squcr Il Co. did
| business large sums of money were deposited
with them which were converted to their own
use and not turned over TO the assignee.
They further charge that james H. Edmonds
Is not the owner Of nor entitled to, the securi-
Ties and vouchers which have been turned
over to him, but that they represent Che assets
oil Squicr d Co.; that many of these notes and
vouchers were Endorsed specially and payable
onyt ]. II. Squer & Co. The complninants
also represent that Mt the time Mr.. Edmonds
lled his petition asking to have the securities
turned over tu him he was unable and by his
counsel confessed in court his inability to
specify any considerable number OF the sccur-
ties TO which he claimed to be entitled:
They say that they have been informed
that Mr. kdmonds has been Interested
In the business with Squier Y Co. for a
number of years past; that there arc one or
more contracts in writing between him aud
Squler, which, II Is claimed, define their rcla-
lions to each other and are the basis upon
which they were doing business. While the
complainants have b, IN unable to get access
TO these contracts, they have been informed
that they are such agreements rs In effect
make Mr.. Edmonds partner with Squicr "
Co. in the business which was carried on by
the latter They charged that Mr.. Edmonds
had been n partner With Squicr q Co for sew
eral years, and was so ut the time of the failure
Di tho hnuls md TINT hig uttpuNft To claim the
bulk of the assets Is in fraud of the rights OF
the creditors; that the notes mentioned in the
petition Of Mr.. Edmonds one for SlOOOO ana
the other for $1,000, purporting TO bear date
Aug. /, 1888, are mere pretense and were given
with the intent to cover up and scCrete the
real manner of tranSacting business between
Squier and Edmonds, and TINT Squier " Co; did
not owe to Mr.. Edmonds any such sum Ihey
also charge TINT If Squicr & Co. arc indebted
to Mr.. EdmOnds Mt all he has no legal right to
claim the securities turned over 10 MN, but
that the assets In his possession arc portion
of the assets of Squier Il Co., and should be
delivered over to the receiver. The complain
ants also represent that during all the time
that Mr. Edmonds has been interested in the
business of Squier & Co. he has been contin-
ually drawing ont from the firm large sums of
money, ms interest upon sums which he claims
he advanced or put into the firm, anu that the
payment of interest to him has been largely in
excess OF that allowed by law, in many in.
stances rs great as IL per cent per month,
and in the aggregate he has drawn, of the de-
pOsitOrs money many thousands of dollars i'll
the way of unlawful interest, and should he re-
uiredtorcftindi The complninnntsp pray that
Mr.. EdmOnds may be required to set forth
his business relations with Squier-how long
they continued, what was the consideration
for the giving by Squicr Il Co. of the two notes,
and when II passed from Edmonds to Squier,
and what Squcr d Co. did with the consider
alton for what the notes were given, They
also ask that Mr.. Edmonds file with his an
swer every written contract that was ever
made between him and Suuier in relation to
any business transactions they had together;
also state when the vouchers were placed in
the safe claimed by him and who was present
when 1t was done; that he set forth how much
money has been paid him by Squier ~ Co. or
how much he has drawn out of the concern in
any manner rs interest upon money invested
for MIN in the purchasing of vouchers; also
that he set forth what sums of money he had
put into the firm of Squier u Co. or what
amount he advanced for the purpose of buy
ing or specializing in the purchase of vouchers
of army or navy officers, and whether 1t was
paid in cash or by check.