The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-01-16

! ton in this case, it seemed to me that
| the case of fraud which is alleged in the
complaint was not made out. Never
! theless l thought it might be that if the
plaintiff was given reasonable time he
might, upon a full hearing, be enabled
to establish substantially the charges
set out in the complaint. Therefore, at
( the risk of possible injury TO the bust
ness of the corporation, I decided not
to pass upon the preliminary motion
until 1 could hear further from the wit
nesses upon the matter charged in the
complaint.
Without now taking time to give a
resume of the testimony, it seems to
me that it does not sustain the charge
that these 44,S00 shares of stock were
in whole or in part bought with the
money or property of the company.
| The evidence seems rather to show
that Ryan bought the stock about the
LIST of November, 1895 The evidence
shows that at that time Ryan was not
a director or stakeholder in the cor
poratiOn, and that at that time he, in
substance. promised to pay Wilson l.
Snyder ana Henry Shields $4,000 for the
"A, 500 shares and to assist them to get
claim which they had against the
Ajax company = for about $25, 600. Sc
cured, as Snyder expresses it, as a first
| lien upon the company.
subsequently, III Jan udTy, 1850, Ryan
became a member of the company, and
thereupon he stated to Snyder that
having since become a director of the
company he could no longer be bound
by the agreement to assist in getting
a lien upon the property of the COM
pany and as part of the consideration
for the purchase for this 1880 shares
of stock.
1.-The evidence shows that Ryan paid
SNYDER q IS flQ0 which he n IN
pay and that Knox had no connection
with the transaction, the evidence
showing that at some time after the
1st of November 1885 being president
of the National Bank of the Republic,
he loaned. for the bank, to Ryan vari-
Gus sums of money and took these
shares of stock and other collateral Sc
curity for the loans thus made.
while there is some evidence in the
case which tends to show the unity of
the transaction of Nov. l. 1895, and the
transaction of March and April fol-
lowing, yet no one, l think, can say
that il is clearly shown to the mind of
a disinterested person that the fact is
So The evidence shows that Shields
and Snyder once offered to produce evil
dence for the benefit of Mcintyre that
the transactions were the same, that is
to say, that the bargain of November,
1885, made with Ryan. was in effect a
part of the transactions of March 30,
and April IS, 1896, but the evidence
shows, 1 think, that the knowledge
which they then assumed to have was
but a suspicion that the fact was so.
Whether the evidence in the case
justiies the suspicion may be a matter
about which different minds may diff
fer. but l think that no one can say
that the evidence of fraud is of that
clear and convincing character which
is required in such cases.
"One thing, however, is certain from
this evidence, that so far as the de-
PENDANT Knox and the other directors
of the corporation are concerned, I
think they have never had any reason
TO believe thar the company has any
interest in this stock
For these reasons, I think judgment
should be for the defendants"