The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-12-20

deed was prepared. its preparation. as
we are Informed. was not begun until
after the directors OF the New York
had been informed that a re-
ceiver was appointed. In order TO give
such a deed any legal effect II must be
authorized by all the stockholders Of
the New York company. The talk
about these proceedings being instituted
or carried on as a stock-jobbing propo-
sition Is entirely without foundation in
fact. What people desiring TO deal in
the stock OF the company did with ref
erence to the matter after the appoint
ment of a receiver we do not know, n
we certainly cannot be held to have any
control over persons who may wish to
buy or sell stock in either OF the com
panies. We purchased our stock in
good faith. and both the district and SUI
preme courts have decided that We had
a right to object to the Illegal trans
action sought to be carried out by the
board of directors of our company and
to have IL set aside. That transaction
savored a good lea Of a stock-jobb!ng
proposition and. while II Is not a mat
ter OF particular concern to Us. yet.
since the matter Of good faith has been
brought into the question. l may say
that IL is a notorious fact that claims
" u ldlkG lIlOuilN ~ Nht AANe
extraction of ore have been made by
parties i'm Montana against the Montana
corporation, and that one of the pur-
poses sought to be accomplished by the
directors of the company in the pro-
posed transfer to the New York corpo-
ration was to defeat all such claims
against the Montana company.
1T Is true that a Boston judge re-
fused to issue an injunction in a SINH
lar suit brought in Boston, but he did
so upon the ground that IL was not
necessary to issue a preliminary inJunc-
ton, since counsel for the plaintin in
the case stated to him that ~plaintih's
rights could be protected in the suit
without the injunction being issued. His
remarks upon the case. however. are
quite i'm accord with the decision of the
supreme court of this state upon our
rights. The statement made that our
application for a receiver was for the
purpose of wrecking a corporation Is
absolutely untrue. The New York cor
poration, as / have said. is shown TO
be a naked trespasser upon the prop
erty rights of the Montana corporation.
The directors Of our corporation aban-
doned all of its property to that corpo-
ration. Mr.. Battcrman. the ASSISTANT
superintendent Of the New York corpo-
ration. stated in court a few days aSo
that ne did not know of any property
belonging To the Montana corporation.
or OF any officer or agent OF said cor
poration in Montana. Instead OF at
tempting to wreck a corporation, we
are endeavoring TO have the Boston n
Montana company OF Montana rehabili-
tated and reinvested with its property.
THE only legal means to accomplish
this at our command is by the appoint
ment of a receiver To take charge OF
property and to force an
from the New York company and have
a cancellation of the conveyances made
by the directors of the Montana COM
pany to the New York company; to
' deliver the possession of all of the prop
erty of the Montana company to the
end that il may continue in the future
as il did prior to April s to carry on its
mining business in the state Of Mon
tana. For the benefit of all of its
stockholders. | may say that even now
the New York company and the re-
creant directors of the Montana COM
pany are asserting that the decision
of the supreme court i'm this case Is
not only erroneous. but outrageous, and
are refusing to submit to 1t or to ac-
knowledge the New York company has
no right to the property.
when the rights of the Montana
company and it's stockholders. includ-
ing ourselves. have been fuzzy vindl-
Gated and the New York company has
returned the Montana company all OF
its property n accounted and paid
over the proceeds Of its ore. which II
has wrongfully taken, we shall be sat
isfied, and since the supreme court OF
this state has held that our corpora
ton cannot be despoiled OF its property
by the conduct Of its directors and
some Of its stockholders, ] think that
time is not far distant. But this car
only be done by appointing "A receiver
I know that the appointment of a re.
ceiver is usually considered as an eX.
IRENE measure. that is. i'm cases wher,
he Is appointed for the purpose 81
winding up a corporation or "A bushes.
concern, but as ! have said. the pres.
life Of the corporation, to have IL
property returned to IL and compel I'll
business to be carried on in accordance
with articles of Incorporation in IN,
state of Montana.
80 far as the effect Of this proceed
ing is concerned, il seems to me tina.
when people are advised by the courts
that the business of a corporation mus
be carried on according TO the laws o
this state and it's articles of in~corpor
alton, and that the directors and som,
of the stockholders will not be per
mitted to dispose of all of its propert,
for worthless stock in nothe corpor
alton. or to divert IL from its origina
purpose. IL will inspire confidence n
the courts and satisfy stockholders tina
their rights will be protected i'm Mon
tana."