The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1899-09-22
CHARGE FRAUD
AND C0LLUSI0N,
A Bill to Set Aside the
Ridley Sale.
PROPERTY VALUED AT $3.50, 900.
The Chancellor Asked to EnjOin the In
ternatiOnal Phosphate Company From
Mining on the Ridley Farm, and to
Declare the Sale Void.

non. "A. j. ADernaJny Will nave |
before him at the October term of |
the Chancery Court a case which is
of great interest to the people of
Maury County, as some of the most
prominent people of the county, as
we'll as a considerable sum of money,
are involved, and because the papers
in the suit make some not altogether
pleasant charges.
The parties to the suit are w. P.
Ridley and Webb Ridley, in his own
right and as trustee, residents of
Maury County, against the Inter
national Phosphate Company, ct al,
whose main Office is near Mt. Pleas
ant, and whose largest stockholders
are Messrs. j. II. Carpenter of this
county, and Sheppard and Edmund
Strudwick, of Virginia.
The bill states that on June 18,
1897, w. P. Ridley entered into a
written agree ment, authorizing H.
D. Ruhm to sell the Ridley farm
near Mt. Pleasant, which is now
being worked by the International
Phosphate Co., at $75 per acre for the
whole tract, for which service Mr..
Ruhm should receive 50 600 He re.
ceived a proposition from Carpenter
and Strudwick Offering $75 per acre
for the lands, amounting in the
aggregate to $52 500, to be paid half
cash, balance 2 year notes bearing
So interest; but there could be no
sa until the Court should receive
and act upon such proposition, and
accordingly bill was filed for the sale
of the land at the price agreed upon.
After the filing of the original bill
ana prior to this action, Mr.. Ridley
was approached by Mr.. j. w.
Howard, and was told that he, Mr.,
Howard, and associates, were going
to advance the bid on the land. He
had consulted legal authority and
found that he had right to do so,
he said.
Mr.. Howard and his associates
failed to advance the bid, however,
and the complainants now charge,
on their Information aud belief, that
there were also other parties desir-
ing to bid on the land, but were
inportuned not to do 81 by the pur-
chasers above named.
A portion of the petition says:-
Accomplishments further state and
charge, on Information and belief,
that said Carpenter and Strudwick
These gentlemen were principally
Interested in the phosphate COM
pany agreed to pay, aud did pay to
IL. ID. Ruhm, the sum of 81 800 if
said Ruhm would, under his con-
tract of agency, submit their propo
sition to buy said land; of which
agreement these complainants had
no knowledge, and it was fraudulent
ly suppressed and concealed from
them and this honorable court, and
was. as complainants charge, con-
trary to the terms and provisions of
the contract with said Ruhm."
They charge that if they had
known this they would not have &C
cepted the bid. They further charge
that the agreement entered into
between Carpenter and the Strud
wicks and Howard was a mere de.
vice resorted to by Carpenter and
the Strudwicks for the purpose OF
suppressing the biddings for sale
laud, and to prevent the same from
bringing a full and fair price as il
would have done IL there had beer
full and fair competition" They
well knew" continues the bill, "tha
said Ho ward would not, and coulC
not, after said contract, enter into
competition for said land, and by
such means they hoped to become
and did become, the successful bid.
der at a sum less than would hav,
otherwise been realized for the sam,
: but for such fraudulent acts"
| nha nafifinnnrs claim ann oh a ROY.
in substance and sum total that
Howard and his associates were al
lowed half interest in the purchase
without the payment of anythin
therefor, from which they realized
5000, not to bid on the property
and they pray, in substance:
That publication be made an
legal process issue bringing the ln
ternational Phosphate Company int
court, and that they be made to an
sWec this bill-oath being waived.
2. That an injunction may issu
restraining the International PhOs
phate company from mining on tn
lands, or selling same, or the roc
therefrom.
g. That a receiver be appointe
to take charge of said property pend
Ing the order of the court.
4. That this last bill take prece
dence over tll other bills relative t
4 said property now in court.
. That the sale to the Interna
tional Phosphate Company be st
r asiue aud annulled aud declared {
a be utterly void, for fraud, and tina
: said conveyance from w. p. Ride
= be annulled.
. 6 That cOmplainants may hav
= such other, further and general rt
{ liet as they may be entitled to o
/ the facts Of the case.
+. The bill alleges that the propert
/ contains not less than two nundre
, and fifty thou ands tons Of phOsphat
= rock, worth 81 per ton in the ground
that being The royalty price Of ths
! grade Of rock TN that sec ion.
/ Messrs. G.. +. Hughes and W. !
Greenlaw are solicitors for the con
} plainan,s, aud Figuers & Padget an
+. II. Hatcher for the defendants.