The evening times., 1896-07-20
SUED FOR An ACCOUNTING
Serious Charge Against Bike
Maker Joseph A. Thorn.
ID
NEW ASSIGNEE DESIRED
Chicago Firm in Its Petition Declares
Ttiat Thorn Has Deliberately De-
frauded His Creditors for Many
Months with View to an Assign-
ment-Assignee Is Not Favored.

Joseph A. Thorn, the tfcycie manurac-
turer, who recently mace an,assignment In
his brother, Charles L. Thorn, was sued
today by the George l.. Thompson manurac-
turing Company, or Chicago ioran account
ing. The assignee is also joined in the
suit and an injunction demanded against
him.
Tne bill of complaint filed against the
brothers by Wharton L. Lester, attorney
Tor The piaiGiiff, this afternoon is filled
with charges OF Il more or less serious
Gature. II set forth that Joseph Thorn
began buying, chiefly for credit, large
quantities or bicycle goods and merchan-
Gisr as early as last May He gave his
proni>sUry notes Tor the purchases.
About April or May, II was claimed, he
conceived and began TO carry out u scheme
to deiraud lis creditors, one of whom was
the complaining company. Shortly after
his snany purchases ofnaterial, II wasstated,
he began to sell bicycles ut auction and
private sale at sums much below his usual
prices. Some Of tie bikes lie sold for $40
to $50, while they were marketable at
three and four times us much. Even the
parts of some OF the wheels cost more than
lie sold tie whole wheel for.
THE SALES OF PARTS.
During The present month, the complain
ant recited. Mr.. Thor, sold parts of bicycles
! for less money than ,ney actually cost him,
/ Or what lie agreed to pay for them. The
complaining creditor asserted that the de-
! fendant was indebted TO him in the sum
| of 81 014.40, while his other debts would
reach from $50 900 TO $4,000.
| 1t was asserted by the complainant that
! all this was done by Mr.. Thorn with
view To defraud. He cuntcnded that he
! would be able To prove by the affidavit
| of one Hadger that Thorn had given his
reason for disposing of the parts OF the
| wheels SO chcaply, because he intended to
make an assignment about August /.
The manufacturing company asserted
| that Mr.. Thorn must have received large
sum of money from the Mlny sale he made.
| Still, it is insisted, he has turned no cash
over to his brother and assignee. Conse-
! quently it is charged that he has otherwise
! ,r,s 'n-rav -.'E icrthe purpoS eof dcfraud
/ ing his creditors.
| For two DAYS before the assignment and
| on the morning OF the assignment, II is al
lcrcd, the first defendant removed large
| quantities of finished and unfinished bicy-
cles and secretcd them in various places.
WANT A NEW ASSIGNEE.
About this time. it was alleged. Charles E.
| Thorn, the future assignee, was with his
| brotBer at the time the goods were re-
| moved. He has not demanded as assignee
explanation from his hTOuner or required
an accounting, the bill alleged.
! By several acts, it was held Charles Z.
! Thorn has shown that he is an improper
person to act as trustee under the deed OF
assignment tits feared that he willneither
attempt TO recover the goods carried away
nor to collect the moneys due. His removal
from the office is therefore asked. and the
| appointment of a receiver requested. II Is
| also asked that lie he enioined from ina king
any further sales or attempts at collections