New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-05-23
WANTS TO RECOVER 100000.
AN ASSIGNEE SUES TRACTION COMPANY
FOR ALLEGED VIOLATION OF
AGREEMENT

David NJ. Smith Is suing the United Traction and
Electric Company in the Supreme Court to recover
$500 OO0. which the plaintiff alleges IS due him as
the result Of the failure Of the defendant company
TO keep certain alleged contracts for the transfer
OF stock The trial Of the suit began before JUS
tice Bschoff in Part VII OF the Supreme Court yes
terday.
Senator Nelson W. Adrldge. OF Rhode Island, as
president OF the defendant company. was in court
when the trial began. He is looking ont for the IN
terests OF the company. According TO the COM
plant, the defendant company was Incorporated
under the laws Of New-Jersey. and owns and OPP
crates certain street railroads in Providence.
Prior TO December A. 1898. the Interstate Railway
Company operated certain street railways In Mas
sachusetts towns and subsequently received. by
an act Of the legislature the right 10 extend its
tracks into Rhode Island The controlling stock OF
this company owned by Homer Daggatt, VIII
lam H. Haskell. William A. Walton. William y.
Otis and Henry ". Harvey.
on May l. 1893. the Daggett syndicate entered
into contract with the United Traction and Elec-
trio Company whereby Daggett and his associates
sold to the traction company 200 shares OF the
Interstate companys stock. representing control-
ing interest In the road. In consideration OF the
transfer II is alleged Daggett and his associates
guaranteed the issuance OF $4,000 worth OF bonds
OF the new concern In December Of the same
year. however, a new contract was drawn up. The
subject matter says the complaint. contained about
the same general provisions as the old one Sub
sequently the Interstate Street Railway Company
was found 70 be insolvent, and a receiver was APP
pointed. scheme OF reorganization was drawn
10. and subsequently the road put up for sale
by the receiver.
II Is alleged that the United Traction and Elec-
trio Company agreed 70 protect the stockholders
and agreed 10 bid the road in at the sale for an
amount upward OF $4,000. Just prior TO the sale
however the plaintiff, Smith. 10 whom the claims
OF the other intel ested parties had been assigned,
asserts that the defendant company violated their
agreement and bid the road in for $1,000 smith
now sues to the difference between the
price for which the road BID in tSlOouVO ana
the contract price named, $4,000 In It's answer 70
the com plant, the defendant company denies any
bad faith in the purchase of the road AT the SAFE
The United Traction and Electric Company Writ
ually owns controls the majority OF the street
railroads in Rhode Island. and mas capltal OF
about 100000 1t seems that before the agreemeht
entered into between the Dagaett syndicate ana the
United Traction and Electric Companyt heayy
mortgage upon the Interstate Railroad company
road was held by the Atteboro Railroad company
II was under pressure OF this company that tho
foreclosure sale held
II Is charged by the plaintiff at when the road
was nut up for sale agreement was made be-
tween Marston Perry, OF the directors OF the
Traction Company. and the company ITSELF that
fhe road should he bid I'm by Perry who repre-
sented other directors OF the United Traction and
FIecfric Company besides himself.
Tho trial will be continued to-day.