The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1866-05-01
OIL specuIatIons in western Virginia
General AVerlIT's Famous ComPa-
ny---A Glimpse behind the Scenes.

| nY---A Glimpse Behind the Scenes.
From Lhe Ne,D York Tribune.
In the Supreme Court Chambers, yes
terday, before Justice Clerke, the case
of Wm. w. Averill against Leonard w.
jerome and others, was an action
brought by Gen. Averill, of cavalry
fame, against jerome, Riggs q Co., and
in the Fall of 1864, II. +. Averin pro-
cured contracts for the purchase of
about ), 500 acres of land in Putnam
county, West Virginia, the contracts be-
ing made in the name Of Henry :: Kay
| mond and Jas. Carson, but intended Tor
the Joint use of those parties and Hora-
ito F. and Oscar J. Aver-u. That on
the I4th of February, 1855, the rights
under those contracts all being in Je-
rome, Riggs & Co., Henry j. Raymond, (,
VIM. Whitewright, tr., z. s. Forbes, -:
II. Hutton, o. J.and III. F. Ayerill, and
the plaintiff, they formed a joint STOCK
! Oil Company, of which the plaintiff was
elected President, and III. f. AYertL,
Superintendent, That the latter was
directed by the trustees togo at once to
| West Virginia, and went accordingly;
that he expended over 800, 900, which
wns paid by Elisha Riggs as Treasurer,
and Jerome, Riggs s. CO., bankers Of the
Company; among other things laying
out village named Raymond City,
covering 125 acres, caused bricks to be
manufactured, erected a saW-mtll, ana
mined quantity of coal. He was 70
| have 81 900 per annum, and the pInlnL-
tthat neither has been paid, the
Company saying that the payment de-
pends on plaintiffs joining in dlSSoIv-
| ing the Company and creating new
one; that in organizing the Company,
| 2O, 900 shares of stock were to be deliv-
cred to Raymond and Carson Ior tne
| land, who were to keep 6,OOO shares as
working capital, and distribute the re-
maining Il, 600 among the associates,
the plaintiffs share being 1,6SO shares;
that Raymond and Riggs have refused
| to make the conveyance to the COM
pany; that 500 acres of the land have
been paid for, and SIS, 900 still remains
| due; that in May last a resolution was
passed to sell the 9, 1000 shares of work
ing capital at $40 per share, and Riggs,
| Jerome, Forbes, Hutton and White
wright agreed to take it ut that price,
but have only paid in S112,O0O; the
plaintiff sold 375 of these shares at S40,
paving over to the last named defend
ants $40 per share; that on the ilstioi
January last Gen. Franklin resigned
his position us trustee, and II conf
I Dental clerk of Riggs, Jerome " 20.
was appointed in his place; that on the
Sth of March, thetrustees held meet
ing,of which the plaintiff had no no
| tice and did not attend; they annulled
| the sale of the 6, 600 shares OF stock, and
thatIthey have held other meetings TO de-
wise ways and means to trunSher the
property from the Averill Coal and OIL
| Company to new company to be call
ed the Averill Coal Company. HeasRs,
therefore, for an injunctionon the trus-
tees, the appointment Of a receiver, that
Raymond d Riggs be compelled TO
make their conveyance to the Averil
Coal and Oil Company, and that the
ltexecutioni of the contract to purchase
the {, 5000 shares be compelled.
The defendants aft1dayits set up that
the Averill Coal and Oil Company never
was fully formed, though some prellm-
| mary steps were taken toward 1t. Ihat
there is So, 600 of their money IN the
plaintiffs hands unaccounted for; that
when the original understanding was
entered on, it was u period zot great
speculative excitement, and 1t was eS-
pected that the stock would sell rapidly,
delays this could not be done, and the
scheme was abandoned. This relates TO
the g. 900 shares of the working caPltaI
which was to be Ihrown on the market.
That the agreement TO take this 6,OOO
shares was an agreement among them-
selves, not made with the Company,
which did not exist, nor with the plain
tiff, and that the remainder OF the
scheme being abandoned this agreement
was annulled among themselves as lhey
| had a right to do. That thinking ar
rangementS to have started on too large
a scale, and on account OF the stamp
law and other reasons, and having re-
solved to carry on the development OF
their lands with their own funds, ana
the plaintiff himself strongly urging It,
they resolved to commence new com
puny having the same number tshafes,
| but reducing the par to SIS, SO making
the capital stock 5000 That the res
-olution to that effect though passed
when the General was not present. was
afterwards read at a subsequent meet
| ing, and not objected 10 by him. That
the plaintiff has not paid any money,
and is not stockholder, while the de-
Pendants have advanced Sl62, 600.
They argue that the General is in no
way Injured by the proposed change,
as he is to have the same proportion OF
the stock as before. After argument
the Court took the papers, reserying It's
decision. .tl7.l-
for defendants. R
why Letters Fail OF their Destination.
The Albany Journal of Thursday has
an interesting article upon the subject
of "missing letters" )" which we subjoin.
1t should be promised that the editor
speaks from knowledge derived from
his official position in the Postoffice of
that city: "Wheneyer letters are miss
ed, the fault is charged upon the post
Office. But i'll nine cases out of ten, it
lies with the parties sending the letters.
Take few examples: