Action Conceraing a Shanghaj Millinery Store: Misfortunes of a Profitable Concern jof it. Up to October, plaintiffs' The chief creditors were Messrs. were ignorant of the existence of Harvie, Cooke & Ca., the Russo-the contract, and believed the Asiatic Bank, Messrs. Andersen, money, book debts and stock to be Meyer & Ca., Mr. R. S. F. McBain, ithe property of Mrs. Arcus. On and Messrs. A. E. Thomson September 30, Mrs. Arcus returned "Ca. Negotiation took place with: to Shanghai and on October 5 in- a view to the conduct of the busi-formed plaintiffs and the committee ness being taken over by the credi-j of creditors of the contract with tors, and it was eventually agreed defendant, and on the 8th plaintiffs to continue the business, the credi-informed defendant that they were tors allowing Madame Linoff $800 4
The affairs of a Shanghai mil-! prepared to carry out the terms of month living expenses, the balance linery establishment were the sub- the contract as far as possible upon of profits to be divided pro rata ject of proceedings begun before his defendant paying the amounts among the creditors, and a Mr. Honour Judge Grain in H. M. claimed. At the date of the pre- Pity was put in chiro of the busi-Supreme Court on Monday, and sent action, plaintiffs held a cash ness. In May, the defendant, Miss which promise to be somewhat credit balance of $28,079.61 on Emily Moore, came on the scene, lengthy. Plaintiffs are Messrs. account of monies, debt collections making inquiries with. a view to Seth, Mancell & McLure, who and proceeds of sale. purchasing the business. Miss appear as trustees of the property Defendant or her assigns had Moore offered to pay 50 per cent. of Mrs. Tatiana Linoff Arcus, since July 5, 1921: of the debts, but this was declined, bankrupt, and defendant is Miss! (a) carried on the business; the creditors requiring 75 per cent. muy Moore, of Shanghai. (b) publicly advertised themselves as cash, with Miss Moore's personal According to the statement. of successors in the business note for payment of the balance in enjoyed the fall benefits of the claim, Mrs. Arcus is a Russian, a given time. goodwill, furniture and fixtures, pending subject to the jurisdiction of the contracts, and the lease of the premises.
A BompsHent To THE CREDITORS. Mixed Court. Up to June 23 last, Defendant had refused to make pay-she carried on the business of the On June %, Madame Linoff left ment to plaintiffs under the contract.
Maison des Modes, Broadway, Plaintiffs accordingly claimed Tis.
Shanghai, aid on July 2, Miss ander the name of T. Linoff. On 29,000, G.$11,00, and $11,480, with Moore took possession of the Mai-July 7, plaintiffs were appointed costs. son des Modes premises, announcing" receivers ad interim of her estate that the assignment of the—lease and, by a further order dated to her by Madame Linoff had been The statement of defence alleged August 23, she was declared bank-duly approved by the landlord.of that the terms of the contract had rupt and plaintiffs were appointed, the premises. This announcement not been correctly stated, and de-came as a bombshell to the credi-trustees, an order remaining in full fendant did not admit that she tors, who promptly informed Miss force. In May, 192i Mrs. Arcus entered into the contract with full was insolvent and unable to meet Moore that, as Madame Linoff was ow ledge of the arrangement beher liabilities. On the.17th of that insolvent, any assignment without. tween Mrs. Arcus and her creditors their consent would be invalid and month she entered into an arrangement with her creditors under Defendant denied that she wrong-jin defraud of creditors, and they which a committee of creditors was fully or with intent to defeat the demanded her withdrawal from the ter editors withald information as to appointed to supervise the collec-premises, warning her that by rethe contract. In the alternative, taining the keys and possession she tion of all money due and acerushe maintained that she was under endered herself liable to damages ing to the business. In pursuance no obligation to notify the credi. of that arrangement, she handed for trespass, tors of the contract, such duty (if The next incident was that Mr. over the supervision of the business any) resting on Mrs. Arcus. De-to Mr. John Pity, the nominee of an American attorney now fondant further denied that she had the committee, and a special bank-laeting for Miss Moore, called a enjoyed the full benefits of the Chinese policeman and ejected Mr. ing account was opened. goodwill, etc., and contended that, Pity, the creditor's manager, from PuRoWAse OF THE BusINess. she enjoyed full benefit of the lease; the premises. Messrs. Andersefi, by virtue of the assignment of the Meyer at once filed a petition in In June, 1921, the statement pro-lease. Finally, defendant allege: the Mixed court and Messrs. Seth, ceeded, defendant purchased the that Mrs. Arcus repudiated the Mancell & McClure were appoint-whole of the goodwill, book debts, contract in that she refused to ed receivers in the bankruptcy of ete., of the business and agreed to pay all the debts in connexion with carry out the terms of one of its Madame Linoff. Miss Moore then clauses, refused to work for de-the business, amounting in all to proceeded to form a, company, Ti 29,0c0, G. $11,000, and Mex. fendant, and that the contract was under the title of Mahriah Inccrtherefore rescinded. $39,560. She also agreed fo employ porated, and the position then was Mrs. Arcus in the business at a Mr. A. G. Mossop appeared for that the creditors could not re-salary. She entered into that con-plaintiffs, Mr. P. W. Goldring for cover the premises from Miss Moore tract with full knowledge of the 4 Arcus, and Mr. K. E. New-) becamse she then had not got them. previous arrangement with the credi-man for defendant. nf {In the meantime, she continued to tors. At the expense of defend-carry on the business,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.