The Norfolk Virginian. [volume] (Norfolk, Va.) 186?-189?, 1897-05-13
POI SkUO " TIL ~ =, S
TO BREAIS TIE pOoI..
Thos. F. Ryan sues Mcssrs. saeAnne a.
Watts. afn&
baltimore SUM-

baltimore SUM-
Mr Thomas +. Ryan, Of New York.
Yesterday renewed his attempt to break
the Seaboard and Roanoke railroad
STOCK pool and obtain possession of the
100 shares Of pooled stock purchased hy
him from DR.. Theodore Cooke. OF Balti
more. Mr.. Ryan's proceeding is suit
~ the United States court against
Messrs. Louis NJ. McLane and Leigh Il.
watts. two OF the pooling committee
anu Mrs. Lydia NJ. b. Robinson, widow
and administrators of Mr. Moncurs,
Robinson, the third member
The bill OF complaint is a voluminous
document, and was filed by Messrs Eli
hu Root and John S. Wise. of New
9ork, and Mr. William l.. Marbury, Of
Baltimore, attorney for Mr. Ryan. 1t
states that Nh Ryan purchased the
stock from Dr. Cooke for sl5.sOo on Jan
uary I'd. At the time Of the purchase
Mr.. Cooke staed that the certificate for
me stock No. 754, had been deposited
With Alr. McLane, but he gave Mr. Ryan
an assignment OF 1t. together with an
order upon Mr.. NfcLane to deliver ii to
nr. Ryan. When n formal demand for
the surrender OF the certificate was
made upon MI. N1cLane, he declined
10 give 1t up on the ground that The
STOCK was in the pool A writ OF replc-
YIN was issued to recover the certificate
ana II was then discovered that the GER
certificate, No. 1.151. issued in its place
IN the names OF the pooling committee
Inc pooling committee nave declined
to assign the certificate to Mr. RYAN.
claiming that under the pooling agree
inent they have the right To retain
possession OF the stock for iiye Years
from October >. 1896
1t Is alleged in the bill that the pool
ing agreement is void and OF no effect
III law, ana cannot confer upon the COM
mittee the right to refuse TO deliver the
stock to Mr.. Ryan.
The bill also details the negotiations
between Mr.. Ryan and the pooling
committee Tor the purchase OF the con
trolling interest in the Seaboard and
ROANOKE stock. 1t states that after the
formation Of the pool and the signing
or the agreement by various parties, Oc-
toner D, 1896, Messrs. McLanc, Robinson
ana Watts entered into Il contract with
Mr.. Ryan for the sale Of the stock. MIR
Ryan agreed to purchase at 125 a share
III tile stock that could be pooled al
that price by October 18th, and he de-
posltcd 100000 as Il guarantee or The
lalthlul performances of his pare Of
he contract.
II was the duty OF the committee. The
pili asserts. to obtain all the stock il,
could control ana have it delivered to
Mr.. Ryan. Two Of the committee
Messrs. Watts and Robinson 1t is al
ieScd. did not act in good faith in the
matter, but instead OF trying to prom o, :,
a sale 70 MI Ryan used all their efforts
through the instrumentality of the pool
ing agreement to prevent such sale. 1t
Is claimed that they induced Il number
OF persons TO sign the pool agreement
ana deposit their stock with the cSpuc-
tatlon of receiving Sl26 Il share for it.
ana then voted aginst the sale Of It.
D. ing aplc TO control n sufficient amount
Oh STOCK IN opposition to the sale to nc-
cnmpliSh their purpose. 1t is asserted
iilit the pooling agreement ami rs,,.-
Chilly the use sought To be made OF It
by the majority Of the pooling. commit
lee. was Il fraud upon Mr. RYAN The
ieSal erect OF the death Of Mr.. Robin
SON. II is also claimed, was to dissolve
the pool and put an end to the pooling
agreement.
me court is asked Ia declare the
l""llh:T agreement null and void, TO or
uSr me delivery 10 Air. RYAN or The
stock purchased by him. and to cnioin
me committee from ma king any Other
''Hi'"Sit!oil ~ IT, 10 order WAS passed
on the bill