Equitable Mortgage Company - Philadelphia, PA

Bank Information

Episode Type: Suspension → Closure
Bank Type: state
Start Date: March 10, 1894
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (39.952, -75.164)

Metadata

Model: gpt-5-mini
Short Digest: abe4c9a1

Response Measures

None

Description

Article (New-York Tribune, 1894-03-10) discusses the receivers of the Equitable Mortgage Company and court-ordered reporting by the receivers. No run or temporary suspension described; the company is in receivership, indicating closure/administrative takeover.

Events (1)

1. March 10, 1894 Receivership

Newspaper Excerpt: EQUITABLE MORTGAGE COMPANY RECEIVERS MUST SHOW BOOKS AND REPORT TO THE COURT. ... Mr. Gifford, one of the receivers, declared to the Court that the receivers were now engaged in making up a statement showing in detail the present condition of the company. Judge Lacombe decided ... order the receivers to file with the Court within ten days a report showing present assets and liabilities
Source: newspapers

Newspaper Articles (1)

1. March 10, 1894 New-York Tribune New York, NY

Article from New-York Tribune, March 10, 1894

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

THE COURTS. BONDHOLDERS ENTITLED TO KNOW. EQUITABLE MORTGAGE COMPANY RECEIVERS MUST SHOW BOOKS AND REPORT TO THE COURT. The proceedings recently begun by the Land Title and Trust Company of Philadelphia against the receivers of the Equitable Mortgage Company for an examination of the books and securities of the company. under the direction of the Court, came before Judge Lacombe in the United States Circuit Court yesterday. William W. Porter, of Philadelphia, and Sackett & Bennett, of this city, appeared for the Philadelphia company, and Shearman & Sterling represented the receivers. Mr. Shearman objected to the consideration by the Court of the petition because, as he contended. it was not verified by the proper officer of the Land Title and Trust Company, as required in this State. He also contended that the trust company had never applied directly to the receivers for such examination, and therefore that there had been no refusal on the part of the receivers to show the books and other records of the company. Judge Lacombe said that the bondholders were entitled to an examination of the books of the company. and that if a proper application was shown to have been made to them and refused, the Court would order it. Mr. Sackett said that the motion was not for an examination by the trust company or by its expert, but for an examination conducted by the Court on behalf of all creditors: he contended that the facts shown in the morning papers were such as to call for such action on the part of the Court to protect the interests of all concerned. A large number of other bondholders and stockholders were represented in court, he said, and joined in the application for such examination. Mr. Gifford. one of the receivers, declared to the Court that the receivers were now engaged in making up a statement showing in detail the present condition of the company. Judge Lacombe decided that without going into the details of the charges against the past management at present he would order the receivers to file with the Court within ten days a report showing present assets and liabilities: that upon the filing of that report, if it was found insufficient. the bondholders might renew their motion for the examination under the direction of the Court.