New-York tribune., 1907-10-11
CONSPIRACY CHARGED.
Modiste focuses Knickerbocker
Trust Com pany IN Suit.

Mrs Henrietta c. Schroeder a raodiste at Fifth
avenue and 10Th street, in her answer to a suit
brought against her by the Knickerbocker Trust
Company. charges that she is the victim of a con-
Schroeder is for 5000. with interest, a note.
The answer Of the defendant, filed in the Su-
prerne Court by her attorney. Randolph NJ. New
man. explains that the supposed loan of 5000.
which the note represented, grew out of transac-
tfon in which she purchased from Maurice Mar
+ens an investment broker of No. 50 Broadway.
stock in the New Jersey Terminal Dock and I'm
provement Company, at the market value Of
sl36I
Mrs Schroeder says that Martens represented
IL her that Thomas Ryan H. II. Vreeland and
Harry PAYNE Whitney were interested in the COM
panv and that with its 100000 capital II
Clearing 100000 year. The company has not
been q success and is now undergoing reorganiza-
tion.
Mrs. Schroeder AYERS that Martens induced her
to deposit the S37 shares of stock that she bought
from him with the Knickerbocker Trust Company.
which had underwritten the improvement com
pany's bonds as security for the $1,000 note. She
gave this note TO Martens part payment for the
stock. Mrs. Schroeder paid in cash, she says,
S6l7. The charge that the modiste makes is that
the Knickerbocker Trust Company knew that the
Improvement concern was insolvent- and the ac-
ceptance Of the alleged worthless stock as security
part Of the plan to defraud her. Mr.. New
man her attorney, said yesterday that his client
bought in addition the 337 shares about $50 90
worth Of stock in the improvement company, and
that he represents other clients whose purchases
OF the stock approximate 100000.
The suit against the defendant filed in July.
She IS now Mrs. Burley, but continues 10 use the
name OF Schroeder in her business In which it is
said she has made nearly 100000
IN her answer TO the suit Mrs. Schroeder says
The nature Of the defense is that the plaintiff
never loaned any money 10 the defendant; that
the transaction set forth in the complaint
DTfrp cd nd OF
2 conspiracy 10 cheat and defraud the defendant
II on the belief, Mrs. Schroeder says. that
the loan from the trust company was in good faith
that she paid the balance Of s7.sl7 in cash for
which she now makes a counter claim
Mrs. Schroeder alleges further in her affidavit
that Charles T Barney, president Of the plaintiff
company. at the time Of the above mentioned
transaction a director Of the New Jersey Terminal
Dock and Improvement Company and had knowl-
edge Of all the facts stated and had partial control
and charge Of the said pretended loan of 5000 to
the defendant: that Frederick G. King, Harris A.
Dunn and Benjamin A Allen, officials Of the
plaintiff all had knowledge of the facts stated. The
plaintiff denies all the charges contained in the
answer but nothing further could be obtained yes
tsrday at rhe offices Of Davies, Stone Auerbach,
attorneys for the trust company
Justice Ford, of the Supreme Court. on Septem-
Der 2 directed the officials of the trust company to
appear before Bankson F. Morgan referee and
10 produce the books Of the company. Counsel for
the latter before Justice Mccall yesterday said
the officials were ready 10 appear and furnish in
formation on which issues might be framed, but
objected to producing the books They asked that
Justice Fcrd's order be in part set aside Justice
Mccall reserved decision.
The New Jersey Terminal Dock and Improvement
COMPANY was organized in September, 1905. with a.
capital Of 100000 The company absorbed the
Federal Contracting Company and the Hackensack
Meadows Company.