St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-03-14
NOT EASY TO Get.
The 100000 That Brother
Blethen Asks of Tom
Lowry.
bEiisd
COMPLAINT AND ANSWER.
ok
One Claims q "Verbal Prom
ise," the Other Denies ~
an Agreement. aif
-. 8
A BATTLE ROYAL is ON.
Expensive Legal Talent, and
Lots Of 1t, on Both Or
Sides. r79 y
~ =
A BATTLE ROYAL IS ON.

The suit of Alden J. Blethen, who
owned the Tribune in the palnly
days of its prosperity, against his
former partner in that enterprise,
Thomas Lowry, will probably come
up for trial some time in May.
Messrs Koon, Whelan & Bennett
will contest Mr.. Blethen's 100000
claim, and a brilliant array of legal
talent will prosecute it for all 1T is
worth. In addition to Rea, Huba-
chek &, Healy, Frank M. Nye has
been retained by Mr.. Blethen; also
the firm of Gjertsen & Rand. Though
the trial of the case will hardly be
called before May, the arguments
are practically all contained in the
formal complaint and the answer.
The complaint prepared by the
plaintiffs attorneys goes back over
the entire history of Mr.. Lowry's
connection with the Tribune, from
the time of it's purchase by the two
parties to the suit in 1889 to the date
of the sale to w. ]. Murphy, OF Grand
Forks, in March, 1891. The larger
part of the statements in the COM
plant are concurred in by the de-
PENDANT in the answer, but those
which are essential to the claim of
Mr.. Blethen are carefully denied in
detail.
The complaint cites as a begin
ming the transactions between the
plaintiff and William Henry Smith,
of Chicago. In May, 1889, this Chi
cago gentleman made an agreement
with the owners of the Tribune to
purchase the entire stock of the
company for $3.50, 900, and to enter in
to partnership with the plaintiff,
but, on account of sickness, the gen
tleman furnishing the funds declined
at the last minute to consummate
the deal. The complaint then says
that the plaintiff went to the de-
PENDANT, announcing his intention of
giving up the undertaking; that the
defendant then informed said plain
tiff that it was important to him,
said defendant, and the interests; he
represented, that said newspaper
published by said Tribune company
should be owned and controlled by
his defendants friends, and that
he, for that reason, desired plaintiff
to make the said purchase osten=fbly
alone, but, in fact, for and in behalf
of the plaintiff and defendant in
common, and so to conduct said
newspaper in the interests Of the. de-
fendant, and then and there, as an
lnducement to said plaintiff to as
sumo and undertake the whole of
said contract ostensibly for himself,
and to conSummate alone(ostens. bly,
the purchase of said stock, promised
and agreed to and with said plaintiff
that he (defendan) would join the
plalntf in said purchase, and by
means of his defendants credit,
and otherwise, would provide all the
financial aid and assistance that was
or might become necessary to enable
MIN, the plaintiff, to complete said
contract in his own name and os-
tensibly for himself, and to purchase
and pay for said stock, and carry on
and conduct successfully the print
ing and publishing of said newspa-
poration without the cooperation. of
said Smith, or of any other person
whatsoever, except the defendant. -
The complaint continues in its third
section as follows:
That, relying upon said agreement
an Iiomise of said defendant in the
last preceding paragraph stated, and
III pursuance thereof, and at said de-
PENDANTS request, said plaintiff did. on
the LIST day of June, 1889, purchase all
the capital stock of said Minnesota
Tribune company, paying therefor the
full sum of two hundred and sixty
thousand (s260,00O) dollars, and took to
himself a transfer of said stock. and
that said defendant, to enable the
plaintiff to make such purchase osten.
s1bly alone had Endorsed plaintiff s
notes to the amount of $50, OOO to be
used in the purchase of Tribune stock,
that the notes were to run for one