Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1895-05-23
BAY STATE GAS co.
Argument on the Appointment OF
Receiver.

Addiclss' Answer Filed by His Counsel,
Herbert Ii. Vard-Ihe Bay state Gas
Co. Was Originally the Peninsula In
vestment Co. of Delaware-Capital In
creased From 100000 TO S5.oO0,0O0.
Argument was heard Thursday in the
United States court on the rule asking
for the appointment of receiver Tor the
Bay State Gas Co. of Delaware.
II. II. Ward, attorney for the defendant,
asked leave to file ali answer by the Bay
State Gas Co.. signed by J. Edward Addicks
as president.
II. Mcdonnell of Boston,, one of the com-
plainants, agreed TO the filing oil the
answer asked for by Mr.. Ward.
Mr.. Ward read the bill OF complaint,
setting forth that the company was duly
chartered by the legislature OF this state
under the title of the Peninsula. Invest
ment Co., but the name was afterward
changed to the Bay State Gas Co., all OF
which was admitted i'll the answer.
The defendant also admitted the truth OF
the fact that the capital stock had been III.
creased from 100000 to 100000 ana
said that authority had been given the
directors to increase the stock to $1,000
| 600, but stated that no increase had been
| made.
Replying to the bill Of complaint admis-
sion was made Of ownership of stock in
the Massachusetts companies and the
method of acquiring said stock was ex-
| planned. The defendant admitted the agree
ment to pay per cent interest on the
Sl2,000,00 bonds of the Bay state Co, of
Boston. but denied that the defendant is
under obligations to pay the taxes OF the
Boston gas companies, but admitted the
| obligation to pay the taxes on the stocks
III the trust OF the Mercantile Trust Co.,
| the amount being about 81. 500 annually.
4 xKna Omit tal fl144f l1ar IL "a
legation to take Care of the trust eertiil-
Gates of the Boston companies.
The bill of complaint alleged that
| through the acknowledgement OF the BAY
State Gas Co. the earnings OF the company
decreased. Mr.. Ward denied that the
company was mismanaged and said the
decrease in its earnings was due to orders
of the gas commissioners OF Boston. who
cut down the price of gas from Sl.3O to 81
per 600 cubic feet. Mr.. Ward also denied
that the defendant had wrongfully taken
or had taken from u trust company III
Philadelphia bonds OF the Boston United
Gas Co. to cancel the personal notes oil
John Edward Addicks. but used the bond;
| as collateral for the defendant company
He also denied that Addicks ever specu
lated with the stock OF the defendant com
panv and went short on the market.
Mr.. Ward also denied that Addicks is al
unfit person to be president or director
of the company and that he Is only
small ckholder. Mr.. Ward claimed
that Addicks owned one:tenth OF TN
capital stock of the defendant company
was also holder of $4,000 in incom
bonds, S50,0OO OF Boston United Gas bond
and al the last election pOlled between
$4,000 and 100000 votes and was electe'
/ president, showing the stockholders hat
I confidence in him. Mr.. Ward in his an
swer charged Mcdonnell with bad faitl
and also that he was attempting to wfec
the company and cause much loss to th
! stockholders and the income bond holders
Litigation in the Bay State Gas CO
before Judge Wales in the United State
' circuit court closed Thursday, whe
a counsel on both sides informed hi
/ honor that they were willing to leav
the matter to bis decision without argu
y ment. And that is the position of tn
r notable suit at this moment-leavin
r nothing now but the decision of tn
d court to end litigation.
r A brief resume of the suit is as fo
. lows: A bill was filed March Both {
e this year by William G. Spruance an
y E. G.. Bradford, counsel for the con
e plainant, Thomas ii. Mcdonnell {
y Boston, praying for the appointmeI
y of receiver for the Bay State Gas @
i, and for the issuance Of a prelininar
s injunction. Upon the bill, exhibits an
A. affidavits filed Herewith, the Cou
r: issued restraining order, prohibitin
d the defendant Bay State Gas Co. fro
s. removing books, papers, accounts, Il
- from the district of Delaware.
/ Since then, on various occasions, Il
s, restraining order has been moditie
r. On April list, defendant was allowed
IS deposit certain bonds with the Mercal
lie tile Trust Co. of New York amountin
y y at par value, to $4,000 to meet the r
II auirements of trust agreement
s. tween the Mercantile Trust Co., the BIZ
IA State Gas Co., and others.
e, The restraining order was moditit
r, subsequently again, April Goth, so as
III allow the defendant company TO p;
II Andrew E. Smythe, Boston contractt
a. the sum Of $4,000 for work accor
b, plisned.
10 Thursday in the United States coU
W here argument came up to show eau
he why receiver should not be appoint
and preliminary injunction isst
William G. Spruance, for Mr.. McDo
nell, asked the court for continuan
ly of the hearing on the grounds that n
Bradford, of compliments counsel,
ar engaged in the superior court.
%. Herbert II. Ward, for the defendal
n opposed the motion aud the court {
n dered the hearing to proceed.
ed Complainant's counsel informed Jud
nd Wales that they had no further atflday
to file. Mr.. Ward filed the answer of (
Of defendant company. II covered some
H. pages. While admitting certain forn
he allegations counsel denied insolven
he fraud, mismanagement, and asser
r., thorough solvency and assets of So
il each 81 of indebtedness. He stated q
that j. Edward AddiclSs is the owner
The one-tenth of the Bay State Gas Co. {
in defendant) stock.
IL Counsel filed atiidavlts of William
Inc Miller, secretary and treasurer of
nd Bay State Gas Co.; Of Henry G. Demi
Ia vice president of the Mercantile III
to Co. of New York, who was also SCI
am tary of the defendant company at
lch time the affidavit was taken.
ere The charge of conspiracy between
the Mercantile Trust Go. and j, Edw
TO kddicks was emphatically denied,
on also tine charge that S1,300,00O BoE
'me United Gas bonds were placed wi
ark Philadelphia trust company and
hvpothecated to cover loans for
ileu Addicks.
lsu- At oon Friday Judge Wales gave a
avg cision in the Bay State Gas Co.
ieFe The court made an order dismissing
application of the complainant, Tho
Fl. Mcdonnell, and dissolving the
G of straining order against the Bay
t of Gas Co. The opinion of the court
ne IL | fn1lnwc.