The morning call., 1893-11-26
NO FREEZING-OUT SCHEME.
The San Mateo Company's Latest
Obligations.
TO MAINAIN THE FRANCHISE
1t Is Asserted That G.. G. Butler Is
Responsible for the Present
Financial Crisis.

Behrend Joost. Fabian Joost and the
directors of the San Francisco and San
Mateo Electric Railroad Company filed
with the County Clerk yesterday after
noon their answer to the suit brought
against them and the Sunnyside Con-
struction Company by c. c. Butler and
NJ. II. Turrill.
The suit was brought for an Injunction
to restrain the directors of the San Fran
cisco and San MateO Railroad Company
from selling the shares of delinquent stock
holders on an assessment levy of 81 80
share upon the capital stock Of the CON-
pany. It was claimed in the complaint
that the assessment was quite unnecessary
and was levied by the Joosts for the pur-
pose of gaining absolute control over the
company's capital stock by forcing the
other stockholders to default in payment
of their assessment. 1t was also alleged
that Behrend and Fabian Joost had large
number of shares allotted to them Tor
which they had not paid. and that they
did not represent in capital anything like
a controlling interest in the company.
The answer to the suit states IN the hrst
place that it is not true that the Messrs.
Joost only paid 10 per cent on the shares
They claim now to have fully paid up Tor
all the stock standing in their names.
While G. G. Buffers interest In the corpo-
ration is practically admitted. it is as
serted that N. II. Turrill is merely
creature in the hands of Butler, who
transferred to him five shares of the San
Mateo Company's capital stock for the
purpose of enabling him to have some say
in the matter now before the courts.
The assessment levy of So 30 Der share
is admitted, as Is also the assertion made
by Mr.. Butler, that he offered to pay that
assessment In coupons OF the sunny
defendants claim that the last-named cor
poraton is insolvent. that an arrangement
had been made between the San Fran
cisco and San Mateo company and
the Sunnyside Construction Company
whereby the latter corporation agreed to
build the railroad in consideration Of the
payment OF 1000. QUO, and had not carried
out its contract. Wherefore, the de-
PENDANTS claim that they were justified in
rejecting the offer made by the plaintiff.
G. G. Butler.
Mr.. Butler. il is asserted. desired to OBJ
tain complete control over the San Mateo
Company, and was guilty of gross mis-
management of the cOmpany's affairs; be-
ing responsible for its present poor finan-
cial condition. In consequence of this the
defendant directors claim that Buffers in
terest in the company should be viewed in
a different light from that assumed in the
complaint.
Finally, the defendants assert that the
assessment in question was not levied for
the purpose of freezing out" the other
stockholders, but was made absolutely
necessary by reason of the immediate re-
Quirements of the railroad company. A
list Of these requirements is given. total
80 q 10
claimed, was needed for the purpose of
paying up certain liabilities due, as we'll
as of making certain improvements In
building that were necessary in order to
preserve the franchise.
On these grounds the defendant direc-
tors ask that an injunction as prayed for
In the com plant may not issue and the
same answer is directed to similar suit
brought against the San Mateo Company
by J. Douglas Sanders.