New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-03-13

that she had received certain moneys and promis-
sorry notes in full settlement of her husband
equity In the Cincinnati business. but that the
moneys and notes referred to in that paper Were
never received by her, but were reveived-t ever
received-by Charles Fleischmann as executor OF
Macmillan Feischmann, and the amounts OF sSaT
collected-by him as such executor from hihse"
individually
THE LARGE PROFITS OF THE BUSINESS.
From that time 1898. until September, 1897. the
Eastern business was continued as above Iheh
Charles Fleischmann undertook 10 carry ON the
business OF Fleschmann Co. under the same III III
name. using all the assets that belonged 10 "o'"
and ade amy ded on
10 1887 1t is claimed that the codefendants y,
Many maS handeds Of ihoasands Of dollars profits
from the business from psr,iopaoh a IA wfnIiy
been excluded. 49,, Ma
Johanna Fleischmsnn that the good Will of the
Business which Charles Fleschmann is alleged
NOUS hsE Value and that the pros the business
have amounted 70 many ask tn have the Contracts
Whereby Charles Fielschmann secured the goo %
it FOR himself SET aside void. and that they be
Ies,t to az he hs r ~ is IN &
said instruments had never been executed.
THE ANSWER DENIES TRUST WAS ABUSED.
The executors Of Charles Fleisehmann, in their
answer. deny that any wrong was eomhit'eu' Nj
leee that the estate OF Macmillan Fleischmann
spects that Charles Fleizchmann took possession
of the Western business after fair appraisai, OF
sIseSmssn. anu that the proceeds thereof were
delivered by him over 10 the estate OF MaNlm,an u
estate Of Maximiiian Feischmann in the Eastern
has been en- g s6s ans a"d detail
the confidence and trust reposed In Shariss or
in any manner abused. and these defendants aiiese
that while the said Charles FleisehnaRn was nd der
agreement continue the interest Of said essatSs
Business Of Fleschmann Co. yet. out Of pure
good feeling toward the family OF nus san ,bar
Maximilian fieischmann. expressed in his SAID
aTi WIZ Felschmann requested that said partner
ship should continue for long period as i Ens
mani ne he aiiowed he interest Of said prother
Maximan 10 sy ge sad interest the
same attention and care that were bes{owea ON ms
H@h aara5 and care The Of Maximap
s Mae 5G a apiSsea Of T. s r55S " saw
few c6aF b4o agG in BY m
mann through Elih4 Root and Bronson W ha 0
and his principal bookkeeper H j. Kaiten6seh
who we're examined before maj the Cincinnati
firm books prior and subsequent TO lsV %ere NJ
sackett N ms m sar,ad naH ms Feischmann to
produce the Western books that ex-Surrogate KAN
SOM counsel for defendants; represented 10 nun
S would make fuli carload and the removing Of
! them from Cincinnati would break up the business
| and asked that the plaintiffs and Mrs Johanha
Fleschmann consent, instead to examine the DOCKS
in Cincinnati with expert to ascertain the con-
! tents that they wished to ofrer in eylde
After referring the matter TO John T.. farsoIS
their trial counsel the plaintiffs consented 10 ths
| arrangement and then given notice thdl lue
! nan could not be carried out Accordingly the APP
| pica ton was made for order requiring Jullus
Fleschmann and the other defendants VINO ar ar
now carrying the business, either to deposit me
with clerk of the court for the Inspection
Of The piaintirrs and Mrs. Johanna Fleischmann OF
| else allow such inspection at the oHces ol '"e
company, in New-York and Cincinnati t. ,no r,atn.
The motion yesterday was argued Tor tne pis s
tiffs and Mrs Johanna Fleischmann by Lewis Sass
| Iedverd and for the defendants was oppose4 ps
! G cambridge Smith. Decision was reserved by
! Justice Lawrence.