Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1895-08-21
LARcoMeE4 BOUGHT STOCK
But He Now Claims That It Was Because
Of Misrepresentation
The Affair. the sinepu1ent Beach
Company h.susht Into Court by
Suit Entered Today.

A suit in equity, airing the affairs Of the
Sinepuxent Beach Company, was this az
ternoon Instituted against John F. Wagga-
man, Harvey L.,rPage and Samuel Maddox
by John 3. Lare ombe.
Some time in 1891, so Mr.. Larcombe de-
clares in his bill, he was approached by
Harvey L. Page, who showed to him what
purported to be an agreement to purchase
the controlling interest in Stnepuxent
Beach, and he was Informed by Page that
stock company had peen incorporated,
known as the Sinepuxent Beach Company.
which had purchased the piece Of ocean
beach known as Sinepuxent Beach; that
the property was of immense value. and
that Page used various representations and
arguments to induce Larcombe to become
stakeholder in the company. The latter
goes on to say that Page showed him an
agreement to purchase the controlling In
terest In the property. and that a majority
Of the stock was to be put into pool, to
be held by each party in his name, but to
be voted by Page and John F. Waggaman,
as trustees, who were also to act Is trus-
tees in the management of the stock.
Page informed Larcombe, SO 1t Is main
tanned, that if he Larcombe) became a
party stakeholder in the proposed stock
col, he could have the money invested
by him returned with interest at any time
he might be dissatisfied. and an agreement
to that effect was to be given to him. Mr..
Larcombe says he objected to the agree
ment controlling the stock by trustees, and
then Page represented that the objection
able features would be removed.
Solicited Him to Invest.
Subsequently. according to the bill, Page
wrote to Larcombe from New York, urging
him to call on Waggaman and deposit
5000 to purchase stock, stating that the
Objectionable features Of the agreement
hn Try,o TING IN hn
RESERVATIONS CT Page, who was an old ac-
quaintance and personal friend. Mr.. Lar
colnbe says, he gave Waggaman his check
for 5000 to purchase as many shares of
stock at the rate of $11O a share as $1,000
would buy, the balance of the money to be
returned to him. but, Mr.. Larcombe adds,
the money has never been returned. Later
on, Page informed Larcombe that the
agreement was to be signed by ell parties
interested in the stock, and also that In
view of the objections by other stockhold-
ers, the clauses objected to would be omit
ted and new agreement in different
form gotten up, in which Samuel Maddox
was to be named as a trustee in addition
to Page and Waggaman.
In the spring of 1892, Mr.. Larcombe says,
he received paper, and trusting in Page,
he only read 1t over in a casual way and
did not then perceive the full effect of its
contents Subsequently, Larcombe de-
clares, Page was asked for the agreement
that was to be signed by stockholders, and
also for the balance of cash. but he made
an evasive answer, and told the complain
ant that it would be all right, Maddox
had been made trustee especially to watch
the interests Of the stockholders. Having
the greatest confidence in Maddox, Mr..
Larcombe says he took no further action ;
that in reading over the paper which had
been given him he did not notice the clause
which was inserted in it requiring the con-
sent of a majority of the stockholders in
the pool to dissolve the same. Only recent
ly. maintains Mr. IarcOmbe. was he in
formed that.iin the event the money was
not paid the stock pool could not be dis
solved without the consent of a majority Of
the stockholders. He declares that the pro-
vision of the contract described was in
serted for the purpose Of defrauding him.
Other Statements.
1t is further stated by Larcombe that it
was represented to him that there were no
membranes upon the Sinepuxent Beach
property, but that Waggaman and Page.
by means of controlling majority of the
stock, have a controlling interest in the
company and have incumbered the prop
erty to the extent of $4,000. Recently. it
is recited, Waggaman had an opportunity
Of telling the property SO as to realize $12O
a share for the Stock after having paid of
all Indebtedness, and in addition there
would have been surplus Of $4,000. but
Waggaman refused to make the sale unless
it was agreed that he should receive all the
surplus after paying $40 for each share Of
stock.
Mr. Larcombe asks the court to declare
the contract referred to void, or, II not,
that so much of the contract as prevents
him from receiving his stock be decreed Of
no force, and that the trustees be COM
relled TO deliver to him the stock he claims,
free of all trusts.
A bill almost identical to the foregoing
has been filed against the same defendants
by Arthur d. Addison, who claims that he
delivered $500 to Page for stock.