Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1892-11-10
roArI WINS 4 sKIRMISH.

Court of Common Pleas No. 3, Refuses to
CONTINUE tile Injunction = Allegations
of tile lsill in Equity Having Been De-
nied, tho Court Rules That It is a Case
for II Master.
The supreme officers of the Order of
Tonti have presented to the court Of
common pleas No. 3, Philadelphia,
through their counsel, afiidavits deny
ing generally the allegations in the bill
Of equity recently filed against the
order and the court dissolved the pre-
limlnary injunction which had been
standing against them,
When tho case reached the list early
in the week, Samuel f. Mares, counsel
for the complainants in the equity pro-
ceedings moved for continuance of
the injunction on the ground of mis-
management of the order and because
the supreme officers were doing bust
ness which ieopardized the charter of the
order. Mr.. Mares offered oral testi-
mony to prove his statement, announce
ing that he had subpenaed Supreme
President Wheeler, Supreme Secre.
tary kenney and Supreme Treasurer
Burkhart, with the expectation of
proving by them that during the incum-
bency Of George W. Wright as treasurer
1t was necessary to place him under
$4,000 bonds, three surety companies
going his security, but requiring in
advance a statement from the supreme
officers that Mr.. Wright was man of
integrity and fidelity and that he was
clear of all Indebtedness to the order.
Mr.. Mares said that he expected to
prove BY these witnesses that, although
atph "a % lad O., ~, ~
the supreme officers, Wright was then
IN debt TO the order and subsequently
became Il dcfaulter to the amount Of
S3S,0OO, but that the sureties refused
and yet refuse to settle, because Of the
alleged misrepresentation by the
supreme officers.
The court refused to hear this testi-
mony, ruling that it was n matter Of
evidence for u master in equity. Then
Alr. Mares read the affidavit Of John
Helms, an expert accountant, explain
ing the conduct Of the business Of 'l'onti,
~ financial condition, and setting out i
long line OF figures and arithmctical de-
auctions, for the purpose Of showing
That the scheme was impracticablc. Mr.
Hens said that in seven years there
would be deficiency Of $4,000 600 il
the membership kept up at the present
| rate and the certificates We're liquidatcd
| He said that thirtcen-ninetcenth Of the
certificate holders would have to be
| ignored in the final distribution, and
that it took three men to get every one
man out
This was followed by the reading, by
| Francis Skunk Brown and NJ Hampton
Todd, counsel for the supreme officers,
Of the atiilayits If numerous members
of the order The reading had been
continued until both lawyers were tired
when Judge Gordon asked how many
atlidavits they had.
about $40, replied Mr.. Todd
Judge Gordon consulted with Judge
Reed, and then said that the court
| would consider them filed without read
ing, but at the request of counsel, two
| petitions, one signed by more than 5000
members and the other signed by more
than 1000, protesting against the APP
| polntment of receiver, were read.
Judge Reed then delivered d brief oral
opinion, in which he said that the bill
was brought apparently by q miscon-
ceptlon, by which one member If an
organization involving vast interests
and literally thousands of other mem
bcrs, sought to have its business wound
up; that the court was willing and anX-
lous TO protect the individual interests
of any member of any corporation if il
were just to do so, but it did not intend
to wind up business simply on the
allegations of one member, which were
in direct contradiction of the statements
of others; that if the business of the
order was in fact illegal, the members
had another remedy at law by which lis
charter could be vacated.
Judge Gordon then announced that
the court would refuse to continue the
injunction, on the ground that the allie
cations made in the bill IN equity had
been denied, and on account of the over
whclming protests Of SO many othei
members, the whole case would have &c
go to II master, and that in view Of the
great expense which would be incurred
in carrying the equity proceedings to a
conclusion, the court would direct that
the plaintiffs, within 80 days, enter Sc
curity in $2 900 for costs.
UEDDISCi .iT 81. PIHL'S.
.