The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1882-11-09
A ZIG SUIT.

Tho Mutual UAIOn Telegraph Company
Sued by Stakeholder.
NEW YORK Nov.6-Suit was brought
to-day in the superior court by VIM.
Hendry Cameron, shareholder in the
Mutual Union Telegraph company,
against John q. Moore, Thos. Z. Andy,
George F. Baker, George w. Ballou,
Chas. F. Peck, Harris Z. Eahnestock
and Corrie B. Evans, administrator for
John o. Evans, and others and Mutual
Union telegraph company. Plaintiffs
complaint recites tina: the above men,
toned are directors of tue company; that
the company originally contracted with
the firm of John q. Moore s. Co, which
now consists of John G. Moore and
Thomas q. Purdy, and Of which other
persons mentioned above were secret
partners for the construction and equip
ment of the lines of the company; that
the compensation of the firm for the per-
Torrance of this contract was to be $l4,-
600 900, payable in securities of the
company, including $4,000. 900 in bends
the firm agreed to accept these bonds
aud shares for cash at their nominal or
par value, TO pay the in
| terest on the bonds and to place
the securities upon the market at the
earliest opportunity; that nearly all
these securities have been issued to the
| firm, or to the trustee for the firm, and
| the proceeds of all that have been sold
received by the firm. That defendants,
constituting the controlling majority
of the directors of the telegraph com
panY and also composing the firm of
John G. Moore 81 Co, in said dual Ca
pacity and in defraud the rights of the
company, and in disregard TO the inter
| IS ~ To; OIL, md sItra
shareholders subsequently, agreed be-
tween themselves TO modify tue atore-
mentioned contract for construction,
ETC.; so as
| TO RELIEVE THEMSELVES
| from. frequent interest on bonds, work.
| ing expenses, company and other obi.
| cations for constructions, etc; that de-
| PENDANTS claim the SUBSEQUENT agree
ment is the act of the company, while
| the plaintiff maintains it is ultra wires
null and void; that shares of the CAPT
tai stock were sold by the firm as fully
paid up and par of their normal value and
holders were not liable 10 assessment
thereon; that compensation to the firm
| was grossly in excess of values received
by the company, which did not exceed
three million dollars; that the capital
| shares and some of the bonds were issu-
Ell and delivered By the directors TO said
firm fraudulently; that the bonds so issu-
ed and sold realized for the defendants
three million dollars, and that the entire
issue of nine million dollars capital
shares was without consideration oi
value to the company, and finally that
plaintiff and other shareholders are una
BILE to obtain remedy owing to amajority
of the directors being members of the
firm. Wherefore plaintiff demands
that the agreement modifying the orig
inal contract be declared fraudulent
null and void; that the defendants &C
count to the company for their actual
expenses and real profits under the con.
tract; that the profits be paid over TO the
company; that the firm be required tC
perform the original contract, and that
the firm also account to the company
for the issue and proceeds of the capital
shares. and pay tue difference between
the actual value received for such shares
and the nominal par value thereof.