New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1915-07-02
Company Reorganization
Is Included in Negotia-
lions to End Tangle.
FAMILY MUST QUIT
BUSINESS, Is EDICT
Stock Allo .ments Figure In Lat
est Observation-Disclosures
for S2,4O9,OO0 Payment.

The reorganization piGn for J. B.
Greenhut & Co. was defeated yesleI
day by tie creditors. A substitute
proposition submitted by the GreenhuI
interests at a conference OF counSei
representing the various creditors
committees in the ohicc OF Water -.
Moves will probably be accepted. 90 iC
includes the payment Of ABOUT oV
cents on the dollar and the reorgah'-
zation Of the COMPANY.
The proposals submitted by the IN
dependent creditors include an Imi'e
date cash payment TO creators oI
from % 10 373A cents on the dollar,
tho acceptancc by the Greenhuts OF
the responsibility for S2,40o,OOO when
the Independent Creditors Committee
asserts IS due the J. b. Greenhut
Company from alleged Illegal lndem-
nifty agreement. ~,
rights of merchandise creditors TO
bring individual suits for bills OF
goods sold under false statements OF
the firms financial status be guaran-
teed. The proposal finally provides
that the company be reorgan zed, the
creditors to accept equitable amounts
of first and second preferred stock
for the remainder Of their claims.
Neither J. B. Greenhut nor any mem
Der of his family is to have any con-
troll in the recognized company IN
til every creditor is fully PAID.
The Greenhut lawyers will not re
mort their decision on the matter until
Tuesday. IL was stated last night,
however, that the creditors PROPOSE
ton would be accepted, with trltlhg
notifications.
The original reorganization plan was
finally defeated yesterday noon al
meeting of the creditors protective
committee. The committee refused 10
follow the advice OF its counsel, Klcn-
ard L. Dwight, who urged that the only
way TO save th- reorganization plan
was to indorse it formally,
At the arbitration conference IN MI'
Noyes's Office counsel tor the lnde-
pendent Creditors refused a0aol utely
TO consider the substitute plan oHered
bv the Greenhut interests. After eN-
tended arguments, ths Greenhut law
yers said they desired an amlcaDIe
settlement and asserted that Mr
Greenhut did not want protracted III
igation.
The creditors lawyers made 1t PLAIN
that there would be no compromise
unless the Greenhuts admitted claims
totalling S2.408 900 They also stood
firmly for the right Of merchandise
creditors to sue Independently. lney
did agree, however, not 70 press some
Of the more difficult claims too hard.
1t was determined 70 drop efforts 10
have the bond issue set aside.
The third claim which the creditors
insisted on was the payment OF 50
cents OH every dollar Of their claims
This represents the amount the com
mittee has maintained II could get
quickly through liquidation and lltiga-
ton. -,
The Greenhut counsel at first said
the creditors claims could not be met
Their most persuasive arguments ellcit-
cd nothing more than the flat state
ment that they could take the PROPOSE,
ton or leave IT, I'm either case II would
not be changed. They decided to take
il.
The meeting then settled down 20
real business and there was stru8-
gle over each detail OF the PROPOSED
plan. A compromise OF about 80 cents
was reached on the question Of cash
pavment. On the other two main
propositions the creditors would not
bulge an inch. 1t was conceded that
the Greenhuts were financially able
to make good the $2,40S, 900 in claims.
Peter B. Olney. referee, will open
the next hearing in the bankruptcy
proceeding on Tuesday II the indie.
pendents' plan is accepted there will
be no further examination Of Mr.
Greenhut or other officers Of the com
pany. II not, these Viii be continued.