The age-herald., 1900-02-14
HENRY CLAY PRICK FILES 4 BILL
 IN EQUITY AGAINST MR. CARNEGIE
He Alleges Fraud on the Part of the Defendant ard Asks
 That the Transfer be Set Aside.

1900 was enormously profitable, growing by leaps and jumps from year to year, until tn 1899 the firm actually made on low priced contracts in net profits, after paying all ex- penses of all kinds. $21,OO0,OOO
 s42,OO0,ooO Net Profit
 In November, 1899. Carnegie estimated the net profits tor 1900 at s40,0OO. 900, and Prick then estimated them at $42000,000.
 Carnegie valued the entire property at over s250, ,0O0OO0, and ayowed his ability, in ordinarily prosperous times, to sell the property on the London market for G100,- 000,000 sterling, or $590, ,00O,0oO
 In May, 1899, Carnegie actually received in cash. and still keeps, $1.170 900 given him as a mere bonus for his ninety days option to sell his 5S1A per cent interest in this steel company for $157, ,950 900.
 Tricks per cent on that basis would be worth $16, ,23S 900. Prick now alleges night at the head of this enormously successful busi- ness, whereby at least in part, he made for Carnegie three enormous profits and values, that Carnegie suddenly and with malevolent intent toward him on December 4, 1899, ar bitrarily demanded of him his resignation as chairman, and this without any reason except to graldfy Carnegfe's malice.
 Prick, in tlhe interest of harmony, gave his resignation, and subsequently on the 11th of January, 1900, after Carnegie had thus deprived him of hfs office, ne lCarhe- gie), demanded of Prick that he ttr.cK) should sell to the firm his interest in 1t at a figure which would amount to less than one-half of what this interest is fairly worth Prick refused to sell at that price, but offered to sell and allow three men 10 value the tnteresit sold. Carnegie refused this, and left Prick, threatening him for not yielding to his demand.
 Carnegie's Attempted Scheme
 Prick now, alleges that after his resigna- ton and at the time of this last interview Carnegie was fraudulenty and secretly without Tricks knowledge or consent, at- tempting to carry out a scheme, wh.cn, II successful, would enable Carnegie, as Caf- ne,gie hoped, to confiscate Tricks interest in the firm at probably not much over 33 per cent. of its real va.ue; that is, say, not over $6, 900 000 for what, on une DaSls or Carnegie's option, was worth slo'zos'VeV' This scheme, Prick says he can prove, was ito reinstate and make operative, as exc cuted and abandoned, a so-called ironclad agreement of 1887, which related solely to Carnegie Bros. & Co.,, Limited, and never did include the Carnegie Steel company, limited; and also to attempt to make oind- ing on Trick another so-called dronciau agreement of 1892, which Carnegie never before had executed which Henry Phipps had always refused to execute and which many other partners never signed. This agreement contemplated in 1892, Carnegie knew, as Prick now alleges, was absolutely void in 1899, and yet Carnegie appeared at a meeting of the board of managers of the Carnegie Steel company limited, held Jan uary s. 1900, in Tricks absence, and pre- scented false and misleading resolutions, whereby he attempted to make operative and renstate the so-called ironclad agree ment of 1887, and also directed his CO., partners to sign the so-called agreement of 1892 which neither he nor any of them had heretofore executed. All this, 1t is al- leged Carnegie did secretly and purposely to conceal the knowledge thereof from Prick. Carnegie was enabled to control his partners, because most of them still owed the firm money for their interest, and Carnegie, dominating the firm by a ma jority interest they were unwilling or un- able to withstand his demands. Carnegie induced some of his co-partners to sign the so-caled agreement of 1892, and then, with out warning, sprung upon Prick notice of January 15 1900, which he has also
 fCoptip,,ad on Tbfrd Pooal