The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1895-05-16
BAY STATE Gas COMPANY.
Showing Cause Why a Receiver
Should Not be Appointed.

About Elk weeks ago bill In equity
was filed In the United States Court In the
suit of Thomas II. Mcdonald Of Roston.
against the Bay State Gas Co. of which J.
Edward Addicks is president. Mcdonald
is heavy holder Of Boston United Gas
Bonds.
The officers were ordered to appear with
all their books and papers In Court to
show full account OF all transactions
since the Bay State Gas Company was or
Ranized.
The bill asking for q receiver related
that the company fraudulently Issued. in
1898, $l0, 000, 900 of. new stock; that 1t has
among lite assets bond executed by the
Bay State Company OF Massachusetts, to
J. Edward Addlcks for "a 100000. dated
March, 1895; that the interest on this bond
amounts to nlne-tenths OF the net Profits
OF The business OF the Massachusetts, Com
pany. and that the principal was to be
paid either In money or stock OF the Bay
State Gas Co., OF MASSACHUSETTS; that
among other assets are The capital stock oil
the Dorchester Gas Co, $500 000j the en-
tire capital stock Of the Bay State Gas %.
OF New Jersey amount slss00.0 900; capital
stock OF the kOxbury Gas Co., 5000. 900 the
capital stock OF the South Boston Gas Co..
$4,000 and the stock OF Bay State Co., of
\ massachusetts,. 81, 100000 and an equita.
BILE ownership In the stock Of the Boston
Gaslight Co, which amounted to u, $780,.
900; that this ownership is subject to u
lien OF iirst AND second series OF the BQe.
ton United Gas bonds, Issued by the
Bay State Co. OF New Jersey, and counter.
signed by the Mercantile Trust Co. Of New
York. amounting to $l2,000000.
After reelting the liabilities the bill
charges that Addlcks appropriated 81 500..
900 bonds to his own use
Afterwards as president Of the Delaware
Co.. he announced that the holders OF the
income had no Interest In the Boston
United Gas bonds, sand then he, having
speculnted with the company'R securities
and having gone short OF the stock on the
market, In order to retain control of the
Delaware corporation In spite OF the sale
OF Its stock. caused it to Issue $40. 900, 600
more VI stock without any considerat ton,
for the sole purpose OF controlling the
annual meeting which was to be held In
March 1893.
In spite OF the fact that he had given
up short all stocks In the Delaware Co.,
be caused himself to be retained as presl-
dent aud through his Encouragement
aud fraud the company's securities have
depreolAted SO that stocks that are wor tn
at par 600 are selling now at sS In the open
market.
III the latter part of 1894 the delaware,
Company made bargain with +. ".
Lawson, of Winchester. Mass, by which
II sold to him $1,300, 600 Of tho b. U. G.
bonds and tho $40 600. 90 OF new stock for
totally inadequate price. and thus
to him.
Argument was heard by Judge Wales In
the United States Court this morning. Ii.
II. Ward filed an answer with leave to de.
fend hereafter.
Mr.. Spruance did not object to the filing
of the answer although II had not attach
ed the seal of the Bay state Gas Company
Mr.. Ward read part OF the Dill VI com.
plalnt.
The answer to section of the com.
inin tp,. hat In IA, of
had never been made by the directors
although the stockholders has. Instructed
them to do 80.
10 section 4 the defendant admitted
part Of same. but stated there was more
assets than enumerated. In answer to
the section of tine liabilities the answer
stated that the defendant was not under
any obligations IT, pay the taxes OF the
Boston Gus Company. and denied that the
expenses amounted annually to $500, 900.
Tho legal obligation CONF ialnt WIS ad-
mitted. but tho liability is only condition
al There ID floating Indebtedness of
about 100000. There are no unjust
claims he'd by j. Edward Addloks. Inc
stock cannot be taken as liability.
In answer TO lssotion of the bill of
complaint the answer admitted part but
denied other parts.
Iu Section I the bill claimed that through
misln anagemeut the Massachusetts Leg.
isIhture passed bill IN relation thereto.
anu " 1910 IL aliegeu IuaC the defendant
conspired with the Mercantile Trust
Company Of New York. The latter was
denied as well as The mismunaHoment.
Tho gus in Boston was Cut down in price
from tl.35 to 81 per Thousand ieet.
The net earnings have not fallen off as
much as Nigh have been expected, as the
Bruokline Gas Company was powerful
opponent In addition 10 the cut IN price
OF gas Dy order OF The Gus Commission
OF Boston.
AT the time of going to press Mr., Ward
was Btlil answering the bill OF complaint,