The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-09-29
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Combination Mining and Milling
Company in Litigation.
BEFORE JUDGE LINDSAY
Controversy Between Some OF the Stock
holders and the Directors of the
Company-The Removal
OF the Of1css.

The controversy between some of the
stockholders n directors of the Com
bination Mining & Milling company
was involved in a hearing on an order
to show cause before Judge Lindsay
yesterday in the case of william
Thompson, Henry Williams. ]. II. Har-
per. o.. j. Mcconnell and Lizzie Mer-
rell against the Combination company,
Jesse r. Mellor. Moses Rumsey, l.. NJ.
Rumsey, Charles ID. Mcclure, Paul
Fuse and A. b. Ewing. The action
was brought some time ago to re-
strain the defendants from selling GER
tain stock belonging to the plaintiffs
on account OF their failure to pay an
assessment levied on the stock by the
trustees. The stock was advertised for
sale and was to have been sold at Phil
ipsburg on the 18th OF this month, but
a temporary restraining order was is
sued by Judge Brantly, who was sit
ting for Judge Lindsay. The order was
issued on the facts set out in the COM
plant, which were to the effect that
the assessment levied on the stock was
illegal n void; that the principal
place Of business of the company, ac-
cording to it's articles of Incorporation.
was in Butte, but that in 1892 the rec
ords Of the company were s%urrepti-
tiously taken from Butte TO st. Louis,
which place the defendants have since
considered the principal place of bust
ness of the company. contrary to the
laws of the state: that no authority ex-
listed in the stockholders or trustees to
make the change and no right to make
levy or assessment was possessed by
the directors residing in st. Louis. 1t
appears that the notice of the sale of
The stock was published in a Philips
burg newspaper and not i'm a Silver
Bow county paper, where the principal
office of the company was.
During the arguments on this latter
point the question was raised as to
what the word published" meant as
used in the Law designating that a no
tice must be advertised in a paper pub
lished in the county where the prin-
cipal place Of business of the company
is located f. N. Harwood, one of the
attorneys for the plaintiffs. said the
Anaconda Standard was published In
Butte within the meaning of the law
JOIN f. Forbis. counsel for defendants.
questioned the correctness of Judge
Harwood's definition. and the latter
said that although the Standard was
printed in Anaconda, IL was sent to
Butte by carloads, and was therefore
published in Butte. He said he had
numerous decisions to support that
contention. Mr.. Forbis said the ques-
ton was not in dispute and that he
would admit that the advertisement
was not printed in a paper published in
Silver Bow county.
The principal controversy in the ac-
ton is over the books of the company,
the plaintiffs claiming they have been
deprived of information and knowledge
of the condition Of the company. Mr..
Forbis said the company was ready 10
exhibit the books and said the utmost
good faith had been shown by the de-
PENDANTS. Mr.. Forbis said the latter
would admit that the assessment was
made I'm st. Louis and that an attempt
made to collect il In Montana. He
also admitted that the company's prin-
cipal place Of business was in Butte.
but he argued that the plaintiffs were
stopped from prosecuting the action be-
cause they. as stockholders. were par
ties TO the action by which the records
were moved to ST. Louis.
VIM. Thompson was the first witness
on the stand. He testified that the inn
movements on the Combination mining
in Granite county were worth
$4,000. He had heard hat the mines
had played out" hut two or three
years ago when he was up there the
stock was at par and worth 100000
the plaintiffs owning 100. 900 shares. Mr..
said he stopped at st. Louis
on his way to Egypt and called at the
Office OF the company and asked per-
mission to see the DOCKS. m DOCKS
were shown him. but there were so
many. besides a basketful Of vouch-
ers. that ne did not have time to ex-
anime them. After his return to Butte, |
he demanded a statement from the
company and got II. but 1t was impos-
sible TO tell from II What the condi-
ton of the company was. The witness
the mines produced $500, 600 from
Jan. 1. 1895, to April :, 1897. over n
third Of the stock was advertised for
sale on Sept. IL for non-payment of the
assessment.
II. c. Halves. an expert bookkeeper.
testified that the statement furnished
Mr.. Thompson showed nothing Of the
conditions of the company. except that
the assets amounted TO sl72, 600 over and
above the liabilities.
Surveyor J. H. Harper. secretary OF
the company. was on the witness stand
and testified that he acted as secre-
tary when the office was transferred to
Louis The records Of that meet
ing were offered in evidence. and Mr..
objected TO that portion re-
to the removal proposition. and
the attempt OF the stockholders to take
any action on the matter, because the
law of Montana forbids the removal OF
A state corporation outside it's terri
tory. The our sustained the objec-
ton. and the further hearing was con-
tinued until this morning.