The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1896-04-20
RA!!
$50 O'CLOCK
THEYDISAGREED
Troubles of Members of a
Corporation.
JOSlin Mfg Co.'s Affairs Aired
in Appellate Court.
Trial in Common Pleas Division.
Unique Distinctions.
JOslin Mfg Co.'s Affairs Aired
in Appellate Court.
Trial in Common Pleas Division.
Unique Distinctions.

There was partial hearing this morn
ing in the appellate court on the bill in
equity brought by Arthur W. Dennis
against the Joslin Manufacturing Com
pany and william X. Joslin, treasurer of
said company.
The bill alleges that William T.. Joslin,
Arthur w.,Dennis aud Franz r.. Parsons
were owners OF all the stock of the Joslin
Manufacturing Company in this proper
tion: JosIin, 262 shares; Dennis, 125
shares, and Parsons, 113 shares. The cap
ital stock was $50, 900, divided into shares
of the par value of 800 each. That in the
early part OF Janary, 1894, Joslin, having
no.othA source of income, and being in
poor health and desirous of visit to Cal
ifornia, IL was agreed that he should
iraw out OF the profits OF the concern
such funds as he might need and
that the other stockholders might
do the same, and that at the annual meet
ing OF the corporation, held in July fol-
lowing, there should be an adjustment
,of the sums so drawn out by each stock
holder. the same to be passed as divi-
dends. The amounts drawn out mp to
July, 1894 by the different parties were:
,oslip, s2732 95; Dennis, 5000, and Par
sons, $l40l.67.
At the annual meetipg, the bill further
alleges, the secretary of the corporation,
Mr.. Parsons, was directed to enter the
sums named as dividends after the pay
.nent OF salaries and that in January,
1895, Il wls again agreed TO leave unen-
sered the amounts drawn by members of
the corporation until the following July,
and then entered as dividends In the
same way as they were In July, 1894. Up
to April, 1895. Dennis says he drew $3.50.
All this will prove, 1t is claimed, that the
Va n a
dition, and we'll able to pay them, and
for long while before dividend Of 100
per cent.
In April 1895, the bill further states
that William E- Joslin, having been
thwarted in his attempt to get control OF
another corporation in which the COM
plainant Dennis and said Joslin were in
terested, the latter began scheming to
Interfere with the complainants right In
the Joslin Manufacturing Company and
In order to carry out his purpose he gave
one share of stock to his son, William III.
Joslin, one share to George Hall and
nine shares to II. X. Smith. That at meet
ing of stockholders called after such
transfer of stock at which the complainant
was not present, Smith was elected secre-
tary OF the corporation and he was direct
ed to enter on the books Of the copors.
tion that the moneys drawn by said JOS
lin, Denis and Parsons were paid as ad-
vance and not as dividend. In July,
1896, vote was passed requiring the pay
ment on the part of the complainant OF
$500 Withdrawn by him. His stock was
then advertised for sale. The bill I'm con-
ciusion asks that the respondents may
be restrained from selling the complain
ants stock.
The respondents, in their answer, deny
that there was ever any agreement made
10 consider the money advanced as divi-
dends, nor was there ever any vote passed
TO that effect.
The first witness called today was Mr..
Dennis, the complainant, and the first
question asked him by his counsel, Mr..
Thurston, was whether there had not
been an agreement TO the effect stated i'm
the bill. and TO this he replied affirma-
lively. He then started In to describe
what took place ut tfe meeting of the
corporation when Mr.. Rocker, counsel
for the respondents, objected to this line
of testimony.
Mr.. Rocker held that the records of the
corporation were the proper evidence OF
what was done at the meetins, and not
witbstanding the dissent of Mr.. Ripley,
one OF the counsel for the complainabts,
the court took the same view OF the mat
ter as did Mr.. Rocker.
Mr.. Ripley then wanted to introduce
the books OF the corporation TO show that
something was done In pursuance OF the
agreement referred TO. but Mr.. Rocker
claimed that IL must be shown that the
corporation had taken some formal action
on the matter.
But Mr.. Ripley contended that in this
case there were only three members of the
corporation and they were the directors
and must have met To have transacted the
business OF the corporation.
The court was not convinced by Mr.. Rip
ley's argument, hut he was given permis-
sion to amend his bill by showing that il
was the secretary's fault that the cgree-
ment was not entered upon the records OF
the directors meeting, and the hearing
was postponed.
The Joslin Manufacturing Company Is
engaged I'm the manufacture of corset
and shoe lacings at ScItuate.
In the case of Emma Whitman, execu-
trix, vs. Alpha Il. White, the question
submitted TO the court was whether or
not by the language OF codicil OF the
last Will and testament of james M.
Wright certain notes amounting with i'm
terest TO about 1000 were discharged.
The plaintiff is the executrix OF the latter,
and claims that the language OF the codi-
Gil does not relieve the defendant from
the payment OF the notes. The court took
the papers. T.. X. Parker was attorney
for the executrix, and T.. II. Lincoln rep.
resented the defendant.
Citizens Savings Bank vs. Jonathan q.
Parkhurs'. II was agreed by parties in
interest that the former decree OF this
court enjoining the sale OF n certain
saloon should be SO modified as to permit
the sale OF the saloon OF Hugh DonnelIey
81 public auction.
Page q Owen Tor plaintiff and p. J. Nc
Certhy for defendant.
COMMON PLEAS DIVISION.
The trial OF the suit of william J. shee.
han 10 recover 500 from tae citv of Pro-
vidsnce for injuries received by reason Of
detective sidcweik at Roger Williams
Park was resumed todey.
The pleiniin testified that for eight
weeks he YVES laid up and unable 20 isr-
form bis duties as constable, and was
bus deprived Of sn iacone neccssar ~ for
rs support, and that since the nme Of