Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1891-01-20
AN INJUNCTION ASKED.
The Voigt & Haas Assignment Said to Have
Been Frandulently Made.

The Voigt & Haas Assignment Said to Have
Been Fraudulently Made.
In bill filed by Henry Fera and N. H. White
4 Co. of New York and Charles Knapp. through
Leon Tobriner, against Edward voigt and
Chas. Haas, Of the firm Of Voigt 4 Haas, and
the preferred creditors in the deed OF assign
ment there are some serious charges. The bill
states that the firm had been in business
at 71s It'll street for about seven years. and it is
notorious fact that they had done large
business: that they are creditors to the amount
Of over 81, OO0 and after the assig nment had
been made to o. E. Duffey statement was made
showing the liabilities to be between
S36.OOo and $4,000, of which SIS, 600
is for merchandise and $500 for
money, and the inventory foots up but
$12, 600 or S13, 600. They charge that the as
Segment was arranged to take place after the
holiday trade; that they paid but few Of their
creditors, and that during the holidays they
should have sold large amounts, and Il was q
fact that they did o good business.
FRAUD ALLEGED.
On information and belief they charge that
the assignment was made for the purpose Of
fraud and that they have not turned over all
the assets and cite the fact that F. Goldsmith
OF the firm OF Ingomar, Goldsmith x Co.
called on the night of January 8, 1891, to
collect u bill for SLIGO for merchandise and
they had then diamonds to the value Of $4,000
on hand; that on the 5th instant Goldsmith,
having sued out a writ Of repievin, attempted
to levy on the diamonds, but none could be
found and Voigt claimed to have sold them
the night before They state on information
and belief that diamonds to the value Of $500
and 81 900 were then in the safe and they
claim that had the diamonds been sold the pro-
ceeds should have been turned over; that when
Goldsmith questioned Yoigt as to what
had become of the receipts of the holi-
debts had been paid, but he could not
show. receipts for more than $4,000.
They state that che brother, father,
mother in law and other relatives
are among the preferred creditors; that it ap-
pears that they borrowed $6, 800 within eight
months, and ask discovery and that investi-
cation be made as to what has become of the
funds, stating that no deposit was made in
bank after December 16 and there Is no fund in
bank. '-
LAST spnINa's STATEMENT.
They state that the firm was q member Of the
New York jewelers. board Of trade and on May
q last furnished statement showing assets,
el2, $50. n, and liabilities (merchandise). S.
1888, other sums (relatives), $500; total lia-
bilittes, &3.65S.5S. They sllege that credit was
given on the repre- sensations made.
They charge that the assignment was the
contamination Of q scheme to defraud, of which
the relatives had full knowledge; that although
Dufey sometimes 10 in the store customers are
waited upon by the member Of the families;
that Du6ey' decliu es to 60 into the bona hdes OF
the claims, and shttes that although the inven-
be realized. They therefore pray for IN in
junction, the appointment Of q receiver, &c.
Judge Bradley made . temporary order re-
turnable on the ~ III instant.