Article Text
Capital Savings Bank and Industrial Building and Savings Company. ALLEGED TO BE INSOLVENT Said to Be Practically One Concern and the Money Raised by the Building Company Used as the Funds of the Banks-Injunction Wanted. Suit was instituted in the Supremie Court of the District of Columbia this morning by Messrs. Leckie and Fulton, attorneys, in behalf of Daniel Jordan against the Industrial Building and Savings Company, the Capital Savings Bang, and their officers and directors. The appointment of a receiver and the injunetion of the officers against the disposal of any of the assets are asked, based on the allegation that both concerns are insolvent. . Both the bank and the building and savings company were organized, and have been and are conducted by colored men. Their officers, directors, and customers are colored. The bank is probably the only one of its kind in the world, and as such has figured frequently and prominently in various articles on the progress and advancement being made by the colored race. Officers of the Concerns. The officers of the Industrial Building and Savings Company are Lewis H. Douglass, president: Robert H. Terrell, vice president; Henry E. Baker, secretary; John H. Pierre, treasurer; Leonard C. Bailey, John R. Francis, Andrew F. Hilyer, W. Scott Montgomery, William V. Tunnell, James Storum, Jerome A. Johnson, and Arthur S. Gray, directors. The officers of the Capital Savings Bank are John R. Lynch, president; Jerome A. Johnson, vice president; Douglass B. MeCary, cashier; Robert H. Terrell, secretary, and Leonard C. Bailey treasurer. If the bank has any other officers or directors, Jordan alleges, he does not know it. Aileged to Be Practically One. The offices of both companies are 10cated at 609 F Street northwest, and, Jordan alleges, the bank is conducted by its officers in conjunction with the officers of the Building and Savings Company He declares the institutions are practically one, and are maintaining partly, if not altogether, a kind of banking business rather than a building and loan association. He asserts that the building company exists more in name than in fact, and that its name is used to obtain money for the operation of the bank. The cause of Jordan's suit is found in the allegation that the building company