St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-01-10
MIR. NELSON'S SIDE,
In the Action of MIR. Darr, TO hetain
His official Position.

His Official Position.
Mr.. Marcus NJ. Darr of this city brought
suit On the Goth dav Of December last
against Charles n. Nelson, c. 7. Coggs-
well. Maurice Auerbach and w. 7. Allen,
directors of the C. n. Nelson Lumber COM
many. TO prevent them from discharging
him. Darr, from being treasurer of that
company, and as a ground for such relief,
he charged Mr.. Nelson and Mr.. Coggs-
well with having formed scheme
for wrecking the company and defraud-
ing its stockholders with the aid
of Mr. Allen. but no charges whatever
against Mr.. Auerbach. The substance Of
Mr. Darr's complaint was published at the
time. At that time Mr.. Darr got out and had
served a temporary restraining order. The
matter came up at special term yesterday
before his honor. Judge Wilkin, when the
other side of the case made its appear
ance somewhat, but owing to the pressure
of other business. the judge adjourned the
hearing until Monday evening at his cham
bers. where it is presumed the mat
ter will be disposed Of. The answer
in the case has been served, and fatty con-
tradicts every charge that Mr.. Darr has
made, and is under oath of Mr.. Nelson. as
the president of the company, and Mr..
Auerbach as one of the directors. At the
time Mr.. Darr obtained his restraining Or
der, he made an affidavit concerning his
charges. which are cOntradicted under oath
by lengthy affidavit OF Mr.. Nelson and
one by Mr.. James Smith, Jr., of this city,
late president of the st. Paul & Duluth
railroad and counsel of that company; also
by Mr.. Allen and Mr.. Coggs well, and by
Mr.. Maurice Auerbach and Mr.. w. s. Gull
bertsOn Of New Albany, Ind; also by the
affidavit of the companys auditor. Mr..
Louis Z. White.
From these affidavits it appears Mr..
Darr's troubles have arisen from an at
tempt on his part during last winter. while
Mr.. Nelson was in the New England states
on business for the company, to undermine
and supplant Mr.. Nelson as the president
of the company by circulating statements
derogatory to him and rejecting upon his
integrity as an officer Of the lumber COM
pany. And that Mr.. Nelson on his return
in May last to st. Paul heard for the first
time of these proceedings on the
part of Mr.. Darr, and became eX-
ceedingly angry against him, and i'm
mediately called a meeting of the board of
directors of the lumber company and COM
PEELED Mr.. Darr TO appear before them and
stand an investigation as to the truth of
tigation so had, Mr.. Darr's statements were
shown to be unquestionacly groundless and
frivolous, and that Mr.. Nelson was fully
and completely eXOnerated. 1t further ap-
pears from these affidayits that Mr.. Nelson
was willing to overlook Mr.. Darr's state
mentS and
CONTINUE HIM AS TREASURER
of the company during the following sea-
son, in case the other parties in interest and
directors were willing to do so: and that the
upshOt of the matter at that time was that
Mr.. Darr was reappOinted treasurer of the
company under an amendment of its by
laws such as would withdraw him as far as
practicable from contact with the COM
pany's customers, all conceding that he
was not gifted with happy way of deal
ing with men. The directors in
their aflidavits claim that they did
this with the expectation that
Mr.. Darr on his part, would heart
lily cooperate in carrying on the company's
business. and that his unfortunate break
would prove a lesson to him. But the
afiidayits say that from that time down to
the commencement of this action Mr.. Darr
had been completely successful in securing
the personal ill-will of substantially all the
employees of the corporation. and that his
pleasant as to prove a serious detriment to
the interests Of the company; and
that for that reason, and that
alone, Mr.. Nelson had asked him to resign,
sometime in the early part of Deem
Der, last and that upon Mr.. Darr's refusal a
meeting of the board of directors had been
called for Dec. 80 for the purpose of de-
termining what was best to be done, and that
Mr.. Darr having become satisfied that their
ultimate action would result in his dis
charge brought this action to prevent their
so doing.
This is the sum and substance of the
controversy from the standpoint of the
board Of directors, as it appears in the af-
fidavits. In talking about the matter of
adjournment yesterday the directors coun-
sci suggested that Mr.. Darr could not have
placed much confidence in his statements,
or else he would have asked for a receiver
instead of merely asking to be kept i'm the
employ of the company at fat salary,
against the wishes of all concerned