The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1896-11-15
r.. G. Be PUY CLAIMS TOPLIFF e.
CO.'GAyE SOME CREDITORS
IT, PREFERENCE.
ASKS FOR A RECEIVER NOW.
JUDGE KELLY LEARNS THE DE-
TAILS Off AN INTRICATE BUsI-
NESS TRANSACTION.
TRANSFER OF THE ENTIRE STOCK
Petition Alleges That an Attempt
Was Made to Defraud Some of
the Creditors.

On an application for the appoint
ment of a receiver for the jewelry firm
of Topliff & Co., filed by Richard G..
De Puy and heard before Judge Kelly
at the special term of the district court
yesterday, the details of an intricate
business transaction were brought to
light. It was claimed by the petitioner
that certain creditors had been given
preference by the firm
The petition sets forth that Topliff &
Co. conducted a retail jewelry estab-
lishment in this city and carried a
stock valued at about $4,000, including
the fixtures Of the store and book ac-
counts of the firm. 1t is alleged that
prior to April, 1896, Topliff & Co. were
insolvent and should have made an as
signment for the benefit Of their cred
1tofs, but that instead of SO doing they
delayed the paying of obligations and
devised and consummated" scheme
by which the entire stock of the firm
was transferred to outside parties
without any monetary consideration.
According to the allegations Of the
petition LIZ b. Booker, a young man
scarcely Itwehty-one years of age and
who Was2 at zone time student in the
ed bill of sale for the valuable stock
OF Jewelry of the Topliff concern. 1t
is claimed that Booker is a relative of
Frederick Topliff, and that the trans
fer to him was but a part of the alleg-
ed scheme to defraud the legitimate
creditors of the firm. In payment for
the stock young Booker gave eight
promissory notes, each for $2,242.44
which were also signed by his father
L. E. Booker George r. Toplif is then
alleged to have indorsed the notes and
turned them over to his attorney, who
subsequently called meeting of the
creditors of the firm and explained
what had been done. The creditors
were SURPRISED and indignant, but upon
the alleged assurance that he would
hold the notes for collection as they
matured and divide the money thus
realized pro rata among those to
matter was for a time dropped.
The claim Is now made that the at
torney broke faith with the creditors
and turned the notes over to George r.
Tcpliff, who has since left the state
and jurisdiction of the Minnesota court,
and that l.. E. Booker has bought
claims against Topliff & Co., aggregat-'
ing SO, 600, for 25 per cent of their value
which he now proposes to urge at their
full value for the alleged indebtedness
of the firm to him on the notes Endorsed
by him in payment for the transfer of
stock to- his, son. This course, it is
claimed, simply means that the other
creditors of the firm will realize Moth
ing on the, payment of notes, and that
L. E. Booker will be constituted a pre-
ferred creditor In, support of this
claim it is cited that several of the
notes have fallen due and have not
been paid.
In further support of his allegations
the petitioner shows that the firm
OF Topliff & Co. is still doing business
just the same as before the alleged
fraudulent sale, with the exception that
Frederick Topliff, who is in charge Of
the business, claims to simply be in the
employ of L. E. Booker, the indorser Of
the promissory notes and holder OF the
largest share Of Topliff & Co.'S obliga-
tons. The petitioner, r. G. De Puy, al
leges that he is q creditor of TOpliff &.
Co. in the sum of $4,000, secured by
promissOry notes.
Frederick Topliff was examined by
Ambrose Tighe, the attorney for Mr..
De Puy, and denied the alleged con-
spiracy; also that he was a member Of
the firm at the time the transfer of
sleek was made. He had previously
sold out his interest to his father,
George T9pHfft He denied any knowl-
edge of the consideration of the sale,
but admitted taking an inventory OF
the stock before the sale. Mr.. riEhe
submitted Mr.. 1Iopliff to a severe cross
examination.
L. E. Booker was also examined and
denied having attempted to buy out the
claims against Topliff & Co., but Mr.
Tighe produced a telegram to New
York creditor7eof the firm, signed by
him, soliciting their claim at rs per
cent Of its, full value. Mr.. Booker final
ly admitted that he controlled 49,, 900
worth of Felaims against Topliff & Co..
which he had purchased after the sale
of stock. 9-9
At the. conclusion of the argument
concerning the application for receiv-
er, the court took the matter under
advisementsiUr-