Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1922-04-24
|ERMAyPAY5
! ENTS0N DOLLAR
r.c.lvsr Seeks $500, 900 From
Thirteen New York Broker.
,S., age Firms
REOPEN ,s1oNEHAM' DEAL

N A a,vidend OF from thirty to thirty
a.. cents on the dollar moV now be cx.
.,s,.d by creditors Of the defunct brok-
...,e firm of q. d. DER 4 Co., ac'
cording to the receiver.
'' furthermore, an additional $0Oo,0O0
-. creditors will be demanded this
w. VI ~ thirteen New York brokerage
s.s ws.~ II is declared these firms ac'
nvud n.~ssd commissions from the Dier firm.
r.p"s,ins n to be a bucket shop. and
khT EkNhont nerforming any real service for
W.. w. commissions. Saul s. Myers, Of
Esw We. york. counsel for the receiver. said
NsS ."dsy one firm alone got 100000 OF
this money. - .,.,,
80. is said to be something new. The
s,oevery Of the extent to which the
R,sr Y,I assets were swept away in such
b ...missions has only recently come to
% ,,sht through an intensive study Of the
~. accounts. according 10 Mr.. Myers.
1. Mare Mar than $4,000, 900 belonging to Gus.
tanners @ was mysteriously dissipatcd and
many brokerage houses Of repute, he
ssrs s. are among the benefciaries.
A. the last meeting Of creditors 1t was
,nnounced that from the wrcckagc OF
,hc Tier concern It seemed possible to
soi,oct . about 5000, 900. The chance. Of
rccoyering damages from several
rsslthy firms which had transactions
with the Dier company, knowing IL to be
= bucket shop. made It likely that several
Hundred thousand dollars additional will
hs recoyered, Mr.. Myers said, SO that
net assets Of 81, $50 900 or more may be
S ;onnd to offset liabilities OF more than
$4,000 900. About twenty -fvc cents on
tho dollar was in sight for creditors ut
tho last, announcement. This new devcl-
onmcnt. according to Mr.. Myers, makes
nossiblc a dividend Of thirty to thirty
fyc cents on the dollar.
In a statement issued yesterday on
behalf of the protective committee OF
creditors of the. bankrupt stock broker .
me- firm of Il. ID. Dier & Co., Daniel
". Blumcnthal. attorneys, Of Dbl
broadway, attacked the action OF the
receiver for Dier & Co., in agreeing to
accept 500, 900 in settlement of oil pos
sble claims against Charles a. Stone .
ham, part owner of the Giants. and
made known his intention Of insisting
upon searching public inquiry, into
Mr.. Stoneham's connections with the
case.
ut is absolutely imperative that a
complete investigation be made by our
committee and its counsel" Mr.
Blumenthal said, respecting the fol.
lowing important elements In this bank
ruptcy affair with the end in view oi
recovering for the creditors the money
due them:
First. The real cause which brought
sbout the emulsion of Colonel Hurry
D. Hughes from the Philadelphia Ex :
change at the time he was member
Of the firm of Hughes & Dier.. and
what relation, II any, he had to the
precipitation of Dier g. 20. into bank.
SECOND. The pecuniary interests. il
any, Of Doc Dier and his associates
and Charles-A. Stoneham and his as
sociates in the little business transac-
tion involving $5,3OO.O00 whereby
Charles A.. Stoneham e Go. transferred
is customers accounts to Hughes &
tliThird.y The, pecuniary interest, If
any, that Charles 4. Stoneham and his
associates and Doc Dicr and his as
seciates had in the purchase on the part
.of Charles "A. Stoneham from +. D.
DIR Il, Co. of some 81 400 900 worth
Sf customers securities.
fnFourth. Just what effect. IL any.
the trSnsfer of Charles a. Stoneham &
Co1sacrounts with or without the con
sent Of, Stonehams customers to f. II.
Clarke & Co.. who are now in bank =
ruptcy with liabilities exceeding $500. :
900, will have as to my contention right
along that Stoneham should he held
fssponsible to the customers Of Dicr &
II. Blumenthal further stated: "Our
committee has been called upon to per .
form q big job and we nrc going to dc
II. Eight thousand men and women
hturing in every station of life: widows.
orphans and heroes of the Civil as well
as Of the World War. fiud that they
have been driven to destitute financial
circumstances by reason of the wreckins
Of e. d. DER & Co."
Regarding the assertion that Mr..
Stoneham had transferred his accounts
TO Hughes & DER upon the consent OF
his customers, Mr.. Blumcnthal said:
~ represent many clients who Wig
orously deny that they ever consented
either in writing or otherwise to per.
NIT Mr.. Stoneham to transfer their &c
counts. represent many others who
Il they did consent. did SO only In re.
lance upon the Stoncham statements
and declarations that after a thorough
Investigation IL was found that the firm