Click image to open full size in new tab
Article Text
CREDITORS MAY ASK STATE AID Schettler Depositors Plan to Petition Legislature. TOTAL SHORTAGE IS $70,000 RECEIVER CHARGES INSOLVENCY OF TEN YEARS' STANDING The state legislature will probably be called upon by petition at this session to make some provision toward satisfying the final indebtedness of the defunct Schettler bank in case Receiver R. R. Anderson's three suits against B. H. Schettler and his three wives to recover $36,000 worth of property are successful. Present plans are to present urgent arguments to the legislative body showing that while the 200 creditors do not hold the state responsible for their loss they feel that their interests might have been better protected had the statutes been enforced and that their present plight demands state aid. This proposition and the filing of three amended complaints by Receiver R. R. Anderson against Schettler and his wives, and the failure of Schettler to accept David Hirschi's offer of $50.000 for the property involved in the suits are the latest features in the case. As yet, arrangements to petition the legislature for relief are not complete. The creditors have been quietly discussing the advisability of such course, however, and are agreed that the step would be a wise one. No public announcement regarding the proposition has been made. Amended Compl aint Filed. The second feature, the filing of the amended complaints by Receiver Anderson, is important, as in the amended complaints are given flor the first time figures which the depositors have been anxiously seeking for some time. These relate to the total cash market value of all Schettler's possessions which may be listed as securities of the bank, to his total liabilities and the gross deficit. Of the third feature the failure of Schettler to accept the liberal terms of David Hirschi, representing about fifty depositors of "Dixie," there is little but the bare statement of the Schettler family that "no negotiations are being considered." Mrs. Mary Morgan Schettler stated last night in the absence of her husband. that he was not conferring with Hirschi and that nothing could be said of the proposed sale of the Schettler properties to Hirschi for $50,000. Details of Amendment. The three amendments to the three suits fixed by Receiver R. R. Anderson against Mary Morgan Schettler and B. H. Schettler. as co-defen dants; against Elizabeth Parry Schettler and B. H. Schettler, as co-defendants; and against Peters Schettler and B. H. Schettler, as co-defendaats, all seek to emphasize the allegation that for the past ten years B. H. Schettler has been insolvent. In the second section of the amended cemplaint against Mary Morgan Schettler and her husband is found the charge "that said defendant, B. H. Schettler, was on the 10th day of February. 1892. a private banker. and, as such banker. owned and conducted a private bank in the City of Salt Lake and from thence until the 19th day of October 1904, and that he has been insolvent for as much as ten years preceding the cominencement of this suit.' Receiver Anderson states in the third section of the first amended complaint that he took possession "of all propcrty choses in action, and effects of Π. H. Schettler, as said private banker. so far as receiver was able to identify and discover the same," the cash market value of said possessions being today about $37,000. This section cites "that all of this is in the possession of the plaintiff (Receiver Anderson), and that all has been embraced in the first report to the court, filed Dec. 15, 1904." The indebtedness, the above-quoted section relates. totals $107,000. Total Deficit Is $70,000. In the fourth section of the first amended complaint the receiver says that "all property is now and will be insufficient to satisfy or pay the indebtedness of said B. H. Schettler. as such private banker, by a large sum of money. to-wit. $70,000 In section five of the first amended complaint are found allegations regarding the tardy recording of the deed by which Schettler transferred the Brigham and C street property to his wife, and his reason for so deferring the filing of the deed. This section, in part, charges: "That Aug. 21, 1883, B. H. Schettler made and signed a deed to his wife, Mary Morgan Schettler. which purp orted to transfer to her the follow ing real estate * 100 square rods" on the northwest corner of Brigham and C streets, facing Brigham. This section charges Schettler with retaining the deed in his possession until May 26, 1904, when it was filed with the recorder. The deed was not delivered until the day it was recorded. No consideration, according to the complaint, passed from Mary Morgan Schettler to B. H. Schettler, although the sum of $1 is mentioned in the deed transfer. The dollar, the complaint cites, was simply colorable and did not constitute a consideration in fact. Specific Charge Against Banker. The compiaint further alleges that the control and possession of the prop erty were retained by Schettler "in order that it might appear that said property belonged to him." and was behind the bank. The effect of not placing the deed on record, cites this section, enabled B. H. Schettler to retain the confidence of his depositors and creditors doing business with him, "and they relied on his being the owner of said real estate and thus gave him credit. The complaint goes on to charge Schettler with having paid taxes and assessments on the property concerned and with having held title from April 4. 1867. (the date of President Brigham Young's deed to B. H. Schettler), until May 26, 1904.0 when the deed in favor of Mrs. Schettler was recorded.