The morning call., 1892-04-02
NOW IN And now OUT.
Receiver Sheehy Not Always Sc.
cure in His Appointments.
How the Books CT Newman & Lsvinson Are
Ksp.-A Hearing of the Case To-
Day on It's Merits

Were it not for the property interests in
volyed and jeopardized, the peek-a-boo
game played in connection with the re-
ownership of the partnership affairs of the
firm of Newman e Levinson would be
laughing matter. 1t has been a case of
NOW am receiver" and "now | am not
receiver" for several days.
Upon the filing of the complaint by James
w. Goodwin as administrator of the estate
of John LeyinsoD, asking for the appoint
ment of a receiver, Judge Lawler, to whom
the complaint and affidavit were submitted
on Wednesday, appointed his brother-in-
law. j. 7. Sheehy, and he went in as re-
ceiver and remained such from P. NJ ON
Wednesday until IL VI. on Thursday.
On that day the Newmans appeared be-
fore Presiding Judge Trout and making
the showing that the receiver was appointed
without notice to them, he revoked the APP
pointment OF Judge LAWYER and ordered the
matter heard before Judge hebbard on
Friday morning.
1t appears. however that there il rule
OF the Superior Court that a case cannot be
taken out of a particular department and
assigned to another without the consent of
the Judge OF the department to whom 1t was
originally assigned. This being the case
Judge Lawler, who is confined to his home
by sickness, felt himself justified on Thurs
= u
the revoking order of the presiding Judge
and the assignment to Judge Hehbard and
reappointed Mr.. Sheehy, who again went
into possession of the firms business on
Thursday evening and continued as such
until he was again ousted yesterday M orn-
ing.
REVoKING ORDER.
The matter then came up before Judge
Hebbard, who revoked the revoking order
OF Judge Lawler of Thursday evening,
nlvt nrr lid
ing the appointment of Sheehy and trans
ferring the cause. Sheehy was thus once
more ousted, but Judge Hebbard concluded
to hear the matter this morning on its
merits. These proceedings had yesterday
were on affdavitS. One of these was that
OF Charles Lederer, for eight yeara conf
Dental clerk OF the firm. Itderied that be-
tween June II, 1856, to February 20. 1890, its
books were kept loosely and unintelligibly.
though it is true that three or four pages in
the journal are blank; but there is no sus-
picious feature in this, because it is eem-
mon practice not to place in the journal
those items and accounts in connection with
the business OF the firm which show or
might show the firms profit. These wers
kept blank that the knowledge might not
spread among the subordinate clerks.
As regards other charges he affirmed that
generally the books of account have been
fully, truly and accurately kept. While il is
true that the profits for the year ending
June "a, 1892, were little less than per
cent of the aggregate sales, yet il is lmpos-
sble that they should be either the same or
in the same ratio from one year to another.
True, also. the net earnings for the year
ending February &c, 1890, were only
S5927 %; but il is not true that the books
would show profits of $4,000 40. The ex-
PLANTATION for the falling off in the profits
for the eight months is given in the bolster
| Gus weather which preceded Christmastide
| in 1889, when rain fell for 20 days, 50 that
| the goods had to be sold later at great sac
| rfice.
BALANCE SHEETS.
| The affiant was satisfied that the informa-
| ton on which the allegations of the CON-
plant are based were obtained from his
| yearly balance sheets and the discrepancies
| can readily be accounted for; so also re-
| garding the outstanding accounts, the COIN
| plant swelling the figures by including in
| solvent accounts. The difference regarding
| the merchandise on hand is exactly ac-
| counted for by the deduction of discounts
! and rebates, so also with regard to the
| profits, except AS to another difference OBJ
| tanned on false figures of the plaintiff. The
| firm has charged itself 30 per cent on ali
| suspense accounts. 10 per cent on solvent
| debts and per cent for discounts and re-
! bates. rate increased from per cent. be-
| cause borne out by the fact that for three
years it has been unable to obtain the per
| cent rate.
The system In vogue by the firm has
| been changed from double entry to the
| single-entry system on account of the COM
| pleXity and magnitude Of the business; nor
| is II practicable TO keep the enormous mass
| Of vouchers, besides a great mass stored in
| the basement has been flooded and de-
| stroyed.
The defendants. w. J. aud Benjamin
Newman also fled a verbose affidavit. de
| Dying specifically every allegation of the
administrators complaint, and then rehears-
ing in part the matter of the affidavit OF the
confidential clerk. Their affidavit Is ia
effect that they have greatly increased the
scope of the business; that the daily sales
aggregate 1920; that they employ $50 men
| and women. or more. and that to place
receiver in charge would simply mean ruin
atinn and InsS