The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-08-28
Suit Involving Ownership of the
Pocatello Waterworks.
THE COMPLAINT Is FILED
1t Il Alleged That Murray Violated His
Agreement N Refused to Ad-
vance the Money to
Pay the Men.

Toms me J. j. Cusick against James
4. Murray. The complaint in the case
alleges that during November, 1891, in
the city Of Pocatello, the plaintiffs as
ISOLATED themselves together for the
purpose Of obtaining a franchise from
the city to construct and operate a
water system. and they secured the
franchise on Jan. 8, 1892. For the pur-
pose Of obtaining money with which to
construct such water system, the plant
IFS. i'm December. 1891, entered into an
agreement with the defendant, Murray,
by the terms Of which ne was to al
vance the needed funds. the money 10
be advanced as the work progressed
and to be repaid to Murray out OF the
proceeds derived from the operation OF
the water system or from moneys re-
ceived from bonds issued and sold.
Upon receiving the franchise the plaint-
IFS proceeded to construct the water
system and caused surveys to be made
and plans and specifications To be pre-
pared, located and purchased water
right. and did all things necessary to
complete the plant. In the spring OF
1892. the plant being about completed.
the plaintiffs organized the Pocatello
Water company. limited, with a capital
stock Of 1000 shares of the par value OF
S2J a share.
Al the acquired property was trans
ferred to the corporation and the
plaintiff received 500 shares of the
stock. ON July II, 1892, Mr.. Murray de-
manded that there be transferred To
him 1880 shares Of stock as security
for the money ne had advanced, and
the stock was transferred to him in
trust and with the express understand
ing that when he VAS paid ne would
return the stock. About the first OF
November, 1892, and Immediately prior
To the final completion of the plant a
large sum of money became due 10 the
contractors and laborers. and Murray,
I'm violation Of his previous agreement,
refused to advance the money To pay
the men and refused to carry out the
terms Of his contract unless the plant
if Toms should resign as president OF
the and hat the entire man
gemen and control of the water sys-
tenn and business be turned over To him.
lie also demanded that all the stock
held by Toms and Cusick be turned
over TO him as further security for the
money advanced. The plaintiffs re-
fused to do So and the
coerced them into complying with his
demands by informing the contractors
and laburcrs that they intended to de-
fraud them out of their money and that
I AAlf 'IANN AhNAAAlAA'AAo w " hAA"hA ~ N'"A@
Obtain their money was by the plant
IFS complying with the defendants de-
mands. Thcreupon the contractors and
laborers threatened the plaintiffs and
threatened to hang Toms. In order TO
escape violence and prevent the loss
and destruction of the plant by legal
proceedings by the creditors. Toms
transferred to Murray the remaining
2.1TO shares Of stock and resigned the
| presidency and management of the cor
poration. The stock. while turned over
TO Murray under duress, was received
by him i'm trust for the plaintiffs. with
the understanding that he should hold
il in security for money advanced. The
representations to the contractors and
laborers were made by Murray wilfully
falsely for the purpose of securing
c0ntrol and management of the cOrpor-
alton and its property n affairs, and
for the purpose of fraudulently and in
violation of their previous agreement,
preventing the plaintiffs from repaying
him from the earnings Of the company
or from the moneys received on the
sale of bonds. Ever since the first of
November. 1892, the 2,170 shares of
stock. together with the 1880 shares
previously received by Murray, have
been in his possession and he has been
I'm the exclusive control of the properly
Of the water company and has received
and converted to his own use all the
proceeds derived therefrum. The plant
IFS have repeatedly attempted to Sc
cure the consent of the defendant to the
bonding of the company and its prop
Crty in a sufficient sum To repay him
i'm fulI. but he has always refused to
allow ii TO he lone for any purpose
whatever. 1t is alleged that $500 shares
of the stock are worth at least $50 a
share and that the annual proceeds and
,.,.,,, .V,pi,r.l lnH hnpPaN A. from tho
company amounts TO at least $4,000.
The total advances made by the de-
PENDANT To the ]plaintids and the cor
puration on account Of the construction
and maintenance of the water system
amount 10 about $4,000 all of which,
the plaintiffs believe. has been fully
repaid and received by hin out of the
proceeds and earnings Of the corpora
ton. and the plaintiffs are entitled tothe
possession Of the stock and property.
ON the first of November. 1897. the
plaintiffs demanded an accounting and
statement from the defendant, and
again made a demand yesterday, and
also demanded a return and transfer
OF the 3.g10 shares of stock. all Of which
demands he refused. The plaintiffs say
tina If. on an accounting it is found
that there is still something u the
defendant. they are willing to pay IL,
The plaintiffs further aver that having
been fully repaid and his trusteeshir
being ended, the defendant is o
wrougfully and uulawfully Withholding
the stock from the plaintiffs n has
been 50 holding Il since December, 1892,
with the intention of defrauding the
plaintiffs thereof. but they had had no
knowledge Of such intention until with
i'm the past six months. They ask that
the defendant be ordered To account in
full upon all matters set forth I'm the
complaint. and that II 1t is ound that
he has been fully repaid. or upon pay
meut by plaintiffs To him Of any SUI
that may be found to be due him. that
they have judgment against him fol
he return OF the $3.50 ares of stock
or The alu thereof. S2aS,U0O. Edwin
Norris. George Haldorn and Forbis 4
Evans are attorneys for the plaintiffs