The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-03-22
WASSERMAN SUES
FOR DIVIDENDS.
He WANTS TO RECOVER NEARLY
$4,000 FROM LOUIS
SLOSS.
RESULT OF A STOCK DEAL.
A Too KEEN STRUGGLE FOR VALU.
ABLE LEASES CAUSES LITI-
CATION.

The case of Wasserman against Sloss has
come to trial at last. 1t opened yesterday
before Judge Trout, with the reading of
the pleadings in the case and the testi-
mony given in the East by David Selig-
man, brother-in-law to Wasserman, as to
what had occurred at the interview which
led to the transfer of 400 shares of Wasser-
mans stock in the Alaska Commercial
Company to Sloss. Upon this transfer and
its results the suit now on trial is based.
Nearly $4,000 is the value of the conten-
ton now pending between the merchants,
most OF the sum representing dividends
upon the stock transferred. The cause of
the trouble dates back to May, 1888. At
that time the Alaska Commercial Com
pany was carrying on active negotiations
with the United States and the Russian
governments, with view to securing
leases to take seals in the Boring Sea in
waters controlled by both America and
Russia. The plan was to form a new COM
pany when the new leases had been Sc
cured, allowing the old company to die
with the expiration of the old leases.
To the more easily secure the basis for
the new company, Mr.. Sloss, the defend
ant In the present action, suggested that
each member of the company donate 400
shares of stock toward the formation of the
new company, such stock to be used by
him as he thought best in his negotiations
at Washington. 1t was at first suggested
that he draw upon the stock as he wanted
it, but it was afterward thought best to
assign each 400 shares absolutely to him
for convenience sake.
WassermaD was not quite willing to go
to this length, but he was shown tele-
gram in which John Livingston, another
stakeholder, expressed q willingness to
donate the shares asked and so he finally
agreed to the matter.
The transfer was made in the form of a
sale. Wasserman was given Sloss note for
$50, 900, or at the rate of $50 share, and
the stock was placed in Sloss' name.
Wasserman declares that the stock was to
be reconveyed to him if the negotiations
proved unsuccessful. Sloss claims that it
was an actual sale, and from this has arisen
the suit, for the leases were never secured.
Wasserman's suit is for the dividends
which SlOSS has collected upon the stock
amounting to $170, 900, less the amount of
Sloss' note for $50, 900, made in payment of
the stock. He also claims the value Of the
stock, or its transfer to him, upon return
of Sloss' note. To all of these facts the
testimony of David Seligman is applied, for
he has been intimately acquainted with the
course taken by his brother-in-law in the
matter, and was present at several OF the
interviews at which the transfer was ar
ranged.
Quite little stir was created in the case
when it came up yesterday morning, for
no one could find the amended answer
filed by the defendant to the plaintiffs
complaint. Court was adjourned from IL
o'clock until to allow a search, and it
was agreed to file a copy if the original
could not be found. This was done, as
when court opened again the original was
still unaccounted for.