New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-11-28
PRICE THREE CENTS.
AFTER J. B. SKEHAN'S SUICIDE
A RECEIVER FOR THE FIRM IN WHICH
HE WAS SENIOR PARTNER.

AvERMENTs IN SUIT BY f. s. MENpEIS-I.
CHARGE or MISLEADING REPRESENTATION
DIFFERENT VIEWS or THE BUSINESS
TROUBLES BETWEEN sKEHAN AND THE
LATE ABRAM c. BERNHEfM-A DE-
FENCE OF THE LATTER BY
WILLIAM NJ. IvINs-soME
SERIOUS AccUsA-
TIoNs
The suicide Of James b. Skehsn. committed q
his home In Montclar early Tuesday morn.
irg is one Of the notable tragedies OF Wall
Street. It was asserted yesterday by many who
knew him well that his entire business history
was that Of high-mnded man Of indomltabls
energy. who sought to advance himself solely
by means of business methods which would APP
peal to the integrity II the Street The belief
was expressed that his suicide was due TO the
pressure of business troubles the nature Of
which was indicated by the fact announced ex-
clusively in The Tribune Yesterday that a suit
had been instituted by Mr.. Skehan against the
Bernheim family tor the recovery Of sl2sOoo.
alleged to have been taken from Mr.. Skehan
by the late Abram c. Bernheim. in the course Of
their relations partners. very different
view Of the partners troubles advanced by
the friends OF Mr. Bernheim.
William II. Perkins president OF the Bank Of
America. said yesterday that the bank was
protected dollar for dollar the account Of J.
b. Skehan & Co. The amount involved was said
to be 100000.
APPLICATION FOR A RECEIVER
The firm of ]. b. skehan & Co., doing business
bankers and or Jiers at No. Is Broad-st.. went
into the hands Of receiver yesterday. Judge
Freedman of SuDerOr
Augustus H. Vanderpoe. lawyer. OF No. Wall-i
St., as receiver, with a bond OF $4,000, which
furnished by the Lawyers Surety Company.
The receivership is technically for all the prop
erty Of Emanuel S. Mendes and Frank X
Wright, surviving partners OF the firm OK
j. B. Skehan & Co., in a suit brought by Mr..
Mendels against Mr. Wright The latter
sented to the receivership The liabilities OF
the firm are not stated, but II is asserted that
the debts of the preceding firm OF skehan &s
Bernheim, which placed on the new firm.
will amount to s5O0,OOO.
Mr.. skehan had control Of the business OF the
firm the interest of the TWO other partners OF
the firm being small. Mr.. Skehan according to
their working agreement was TO receive 81 per
cent of the profits, Mr.. Mendels and Mr..
Wright s. and for expenses Mr.. skehan was to
receive $1,000, Mr. Mendels 5000 and Mr.. Wright
81, 400.
ALLEGATIONS IN THE COMPLAINT.
The complaint submitted TO the court by Leo
pold Wallach. attorney for Mr. Mendels. averred
Tat the partnership of ]. b. Skehan & Co. was
formed on september q. 1895. TO take over the
business Of skehan & Bernhe!m. Messrs. skehan.
Mendels and Wright entered into an agreement
of copartnership, the dete!ls OF which were 10 be
more fully set forth in articles OF agreement 10
be executed later which further agreement was
never effected as contemplated; but the business
was conducted under the first agreement The
policy as the conduct OF the business. con-
tracts syndicate liabilities etc. to be in the
sole control Of Mr.. Skeban. The partnership was
to continue for year. and 1t was provided
that the death Of either partner should not dis
solve the firm, but that his interest should con-
tnue In the profits for the term OF the partner
ship When the present. firm was formed. Mr..
Mendels informed that the Skehan & Bern
helm partnership was solvent. had a large capi-
tai and surplus. and that all outstanding ac-
counts were good Since then he has ascertainei
that a large part of the accounts was either un-
coectabe or not available except in litigation.
and that Skehan 4 Bernhem did not have Q
large capital or surplus.
1t also appeared. according to the complaint,
that Mr. Skehan largely involved with GUS
toners Of the concern in Joint accounts in pur-
chase and sale of securities, and that II was
very difficult matter to ascertain the exact LA
bility of the cOpartnership in such joint ac-
counts If any Since the formation of j. b. Ske-
han & Co. 1t is asserted the firm has prose-
cuted successful business. and did contract
in the course of business any debts or liabilities
which il not aLle to meet but ii is declared
that Mr. Skehan appropriated the profits in the
business to the liquidation Of the debts Of Sks-
han & Bernheim.
A SUIT STOPPED BY DEATH
Messrs Mendels and Wright were about to be-
gin a suit against Mr.. Skehan TO set aside the ar.
ticles of copartnership for this and other reasons
but by the death Of Nj SAehan. IL is now said.
the partnership has been dissolved and the sur
yiving partners hold the Of the firm az
trustees for the benefit of the creditors OF J. Il
Skehan & Co. and Skehan & Bernheim. Both
firms are indebted TO various persons in large
amounts Of money great part of which. II 10
alleged is secured by securities belonging to j.
b. Skehan g. Co. a large part of the loans made
by different banking institutions and individuals
to the firm of ]. r. skehan 4 Co. has. since the
death of Mr.. Skehan been called. and II 10
averred that IL such loans not paid of inn
mediately the securities may be sold at sacrifice
and large losses result to the creditors The bank
I'm which the firm has its deposit has refused II 10
averred to pay checks drawn on II in the regular
course of business and has appropriated the de-
posit In liquidation of loans. The liabilities of
Messrs Mendels and Wright as surviving part
ners are It is declared. merely nominal. while the
amount Of debts Of Skehan Bernheim. which
was placed in the new firm. will amount 10
$500 900.
The assets. consisting OF stocks bonds and out.
standing accounts. II they are Judiciously han.
died and not sacrificed. and II they can be col.
lected, it Is asserted. will largely pay all claims