Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1893-11-07

defendant Scnter. ~ The head Of said
corporation; that the typographical APP
praNnce of the paper produced by thcm
was faulty w every mechanical detail,
bctrying wunton carclessuess and rN-
IRENE Ignorance und attracting The ron-
siHut criticisms of the patrons and the
nuhlic' that the said 4. q, Martin. for
Tho promotion of selfish ends. taught The
printers under him TO believe tlnt they
were In immediate control of the hr0n.
crty of The Gazette company, and that
the management 0f It's affairs were sub.
lcci 10 daily revision by them: that the
defendant Sentcr soon after he entered
Tie business department of The defend
nht, discharged for incompctcncy. uu cu-
ployc Of that branch of the business in
no manner connected with the typogrnpb.
irNl department, over which. at HAT time,
the defendant. Martin was in control:
that immediately thereafter special
meeting 0t the stockholders of the com.
muy was called for the purpose Of re-
Sending Ito uciOn Of said defendant
senior, and rcbuking him for presenting
70 uSl contrary To The win of the typn-
graphical department: that the plnititin
60li, one of the directors of the drfenI.
uuS company. was of the signcrs Of Inc
c,'i lot S'nd meeting (Which call is hereto
H,Won'Il und that the plaintiff, Martin
gh9 director Of said cohlpnny. uprniy
declared his sympathy with the cnll' In Il
directors meeting; that said rniirj
uYtunE OF Tue stockholders wDg iu-
silKAtgd ana Inspired entirely by nlnin.
uHs IN TINS bill, who had no ipirrcsf
"I relation whatever with or fo tba cr,,
ploNr So discharged, who was rurlrcl In
an entirely different branch of tbr com,
panN = service. except That he ,v,s {,
mcinher of their secret organization. tbst
al SUI neeung Of the stockholders held
on tue "a OF Septrmhcr 1903, in pur-
sNdu'c 10 the said call the defendant
Nenter rs president of the defendant
eGnpnny and its business manager. with
lle consent and concurrence of t,,n-
thirls of the directors Of the defendant
company, advised the plninti0s herein. nj
sNlu meeting, of their error In suppos.
ing thai the stockholders were In Central
Of the affairs of The Gazette connanv
rs against It's officers and board OF III
rectors, and At said time expressed to
sald plaintiffs the dissatisfaction of tho
management Of the defendant com.
pAny with the work of The said
plaintiffs, aud then notified them that
every incompetent and negligent cmploye
OF the companyin whatever department
who roiuScd TO mend his ways, would
be Summafily dismissed: that said warn.
ings wont UNDECIDED by tho plaintiffs.
aud that they continued insuborlinata.
that the defendant Scntcr, acting for Tho
board OF directors of said company and
rs its principal officer, counspiled with
their secret organization, and was ma.
vised that they felt secure in their posi-.
tlons; they did not believe the bust.
ness management of the defendant had
the power or the nerve to discharge them;
Tint the only remedy left TO the defend.
nut company for their negligence incom-
pctcncc aud rebellion was TO dismiss them
all, which at last was done by the de.
fcudant Sentcr on October 20 1879, as
signing rs reason therefor their incOW,
potency, That IN 40 doing II, G., Som
ter was acting for defendant company rs
Us president as its business manager and
MS its managing editor aud principal and
trusted agent; that he discharged said
printers, believing Il 10 be for the best
interests OF the defendant company, and
did 50 discharge them with the consent
and concurrence and after advice and
counsel with ~ many rs tvo-t thirds Of
the directors of the defendant company
and d majority OF it's stockholders. That
In support of the allegations above
charged against said typographical de.
partmcnt OF said company, composed IN
chief Mt that time Of these plaintiffs,
| defendants here refer and attach exhibits
y and O., and pray that the same he con,
| sldered NJ part Of this answer and defend.
ants would further represent that prior 70
the discharge of Plaintiffs SAIL defendant
| Gazeflc cOmpany had reason 20 diStrust
aud ala distrust the administration OF
| It's affairs IN tho mechanical depart
| ment under plaintiff Martin, induced by
| information which came to Us principal
officers. and which was verified by the
\ books Of the Democrat Publishing coui-
pany In It's possession 10 the effect that
said Martin, while aeting as foreman for
| It's predecessor Of is typographical depart.
mont theing at the same ume under the
| Jurisdiction OF the typographical unionl
| collected from said company for himself
certain sums of money in excess Of what
said company was justly due them under
the scale aud regulations of the uuion
/ then governing said department, amount
/ ing 10 the sum Of about 5000. Defendants
| further Say that the plaintin Mar,in IS
the president OF the national oreaniz0.
| ton OF the Printers Protcotive Traitor
Riiy, an organization engagcd in con.
/ lnugd and haer contests with 9th g.
lahor organizations throughout the coim-
| Try; that ne has with ambitious and mis-
| ehievons designs attempted 20 suhvert
| the business Of tho Gazette company to
the ends Of said organization and 60 prl
moe bis personal aims with reterence
l thereto; that be has set UP aud main-