The White Pine news. [volume] (Treasure City, Nev.) 1868-1906, 1885-08-22
Heavy Mining Suit.
lSan Francisco Examiner

San Francisco Examiner.l
Argument in the important case of
White against Merrill and others will
be heard on Monday next by Judge
Noble Hamilton of Oakland, who is
presiding in Department No. of the
Superior Court of this city in the
place of Judge Wilson. About two
years ago this case was tried before a
jury in Judge Maguire's Court, and a
verdict was returned in favor of the
plaintiff for S146,350. On the alle~
CATION that the jury was drawn in the
interest of the plaintiff, Judge Ma
guire set aside the verdict and a new
trial was granted the defendants. The
plaintiff, Martin White, sues Annis
Merrill, John A. Hooper, F. P.
Hooper, E. d. Sawyer and George G.
Hickox to recover $4,000 damages
for breach of contract. The COM
plant alleges that OH the 2Sth day of
April, 1877, the Martin White Com
pany was in debt to the extent of
100000; that the originator of the
company, Martin White, owned $4,000
out of the 100000 shares of the stock
of the company and was anxious to
prevent the stock from being assessed.
THE SYNDICATE AGREEMENT.
1t is further stated that defendants
Merrill, the Hoopers, Sawyer and
Hickox formed themselves into an
agreement with Martin White that in
consideration of bis assigning and de-
livering to them 10000 shares of his
stock, which was valued at from $40 to
SIS FER share, and turning over to
them the control of the company, to-
gether with $4,000 shares more to per-
petuate themselves in power, they, the
syndicate, would on their part assume
and pay off all the debts of the COM
pany, including debt of T68,0 900 due
from the corporation to Martin White,
and that they would guarantee that
no assessment should be levied by the
corporation after it had passed under
their control; and finally, that after
reimbursing themselves out of the
earnings of the mine for all their out.
lays on behalf of the corporation, out
OF the net earnings, were to pay White
IS share for the 10000 shares and
give back to him the $4,000 shares
left with them to perpetuate them.
selves in control. The complaint
further states that, in pursuance of
this contract, the plaintiff Martin
White delivered to the defendants the
10000 shares and the $4,000 shares of
the stock, which aggregated $4,000.
They then caused the resignation of
the old Board of Directors and the
selection of the syndicate, who are
defendants. 1t is asserted that when
possession was taken of the corpora
ton assessments were Immediately
levied, contrary to agreement. and
that they wiped out the $68,00O Gebt
due to Martin White, which they had
agreed to pay by assessing his stock
to the extent of $44,250.
FURTHER ALLEGATIONS.
1t is claimed they then repudiated
the contract and refused to proceed
with it or carry it out; that they not
only retained the 10000 shares which
had been delivered to them in consid-
Grafton of the agreement, but kept and
converted to their own use $4,000 of
the $4,000 shares that had been left
with them, and did not redeliver to
the plaintiff any portion of the 54,s
900 shares except 5000. In view of
these allegations Martin White asks
judgment against the defendants, first,
for $42,250 of his debt against the
corporation, which he claims was
agreed to be paid, but which was ans
initiated by levying assessments con-
| trArV to a0reemAnt topathar With in.