The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1896-12-21

S75, co., The hotel cost about S45, 000 In
April, 1889, S4 600 was hired OF the Port
land Savings bark to defray the cost of
putting in an electric light plant and TO
erect laundry building. In 1890, S2l77. 81
additional was raised. This was by con-
sent uf the bondholders made a prior
lien. With these expenditures including
Si5, zoo for the land the COST Of the hotel
was about $50, o0G. The hotel was leased
to. Mr.. NJ. S. Gibson for $500 per year
and later the laundry was also leased to
him at $500 or $3.50. Mr.. Gibson failed
in 1890 and broke the lease. Then in 1891
the corporation defaulted on all its debts.
me mortgage was 1oreciosed, the proper
ty bid in for $50, 000 subject to the lien of
S2l77 and n new corporation formed. The
new corporation assessed itself and took
up the $al77. The stockholders who had
endorsed tine savings bank note paid it.
Now the Plaintiff seeks to nave all these
proceedings set aside and the property
restored to the original company under
receiver.
Mr.. Verrill continuing said that the
actions complained of by MIR. Gushing
were participated in by him to an extent
which would leave him out of considers
tion as a complainant. In support of this
claim, Mr.. Ve1rill read from the records
of the corporation showing that Mr..
Gushing was present Mt meeting, wben
the action was discussed and voted upon.
The position Of the defence was that all
the proceedings were open and above
bonrd; that other contracts we've made
in the same way as the Burrowes con-
tract and that the bonds were sold Mt par
and the stock at about $25 snare. LIZ
was o plan to raise money and was car
ried out in good faith from beginning TO
end. MIR. Spring did tho business Tor
the company and kept special account
fnr nIrn0Ea
There was no secresy about IL. IL was
at that time, as the evidence SHOWS, a
m after of common knowledge.
Judge Haskell remarked that the coun-
sci need not. argu3 further on that mat
ter There was no evidence IN the case
to show an intent to defTaua. MI. Cush-
ing. It wes evident that tna5 was not
the motive for the transactions.
Ten holders of the bonds were outside
parties who certainly could not be accused
of knowledge Of any wrong. They bought
their bonds at par and their stock at 20
cents On the dollar III the OPP en- market
and paid their money for it.
They should not now be made to suffer.
The directors did not devise the scheme
to defraud Mr.. Gushing: Hind sight Is
better than foresight. At that time the
venture was regarded as a profitable one.
This is shown by the fact that Mr..
Pitcher himself bought one of the bonds
and so did Other gentlemen interested.
MIR. Dayeis put in several thousand dol
lars.
Mr. Knight SAYS he does not remember
anything about the plumbing contract.
That shows how easy 1t is for men to be
mistaken about things which happened
' ears ago for Mr.. knight was there when
the conti act was awarded to Mr.. W. u.
Pennell for $780, Mr.. Verrill put Into
the case copy of an agreement between
Mr.. Burrowes and Mir. Spring, Mr..
Spring agreeing to pay Mr.. Burrowes
$500 for each bond and S25. so for each
share of stock This is the agreement of
which Mr.. Burrowes had some recOlIec-
ton. Mr.. Verrill read list of stock
transactions showing that other contracts
were paid in tho same way as MIR. Bur-
rowes. He also showed from the records
that Mr.. Cushing himself received for
services performed $40, 600 in stock which
he disposed of to Mr.. Spring for 50, SOL
81. In conclusion Mr.. Verrill asked
W here Mr.. .Cushing's testimony was. He
fired off his allegations through his bill
but when it came To giving his testimony
made oath it WASH t in the case
Mr.. Hale replied briefly to Mr.. Yer.
rill. He said that Mr.. Gushing did not
take the stand because he knew SO little
of the transactions that he could give no
evidence of value. Mr.. Hale said that
Mr.. Gushing was not business man in
the sense that his associates were and
was NOT knowing to the nature of the
transactions of which he complained.
This closed the hearing. Judge Haskell
Immediately announcing his decision.