The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1900-02-14
1900. 1t greatly enlarged the capacity Of its

time for eighteen consecutive months. He
did not pretend to manage the current
business. although ne was consulted as to
important matters
"The business, from 1892 to 1900 was enor-
mously profitable. growing by leaps and
jumps from year to year until, in 1899, the
firm actually made on low-priced contracts
in net profits, after paying expenses OF all
kinds. 81, ,000.J.O In November, 1899. Carne-
gle estimated the net profits for 1900 at
A0,0O00.J. and Frick then estimated them
at SAP. .0o0. 900. Carnegie valued the entire
property at over s250,000,00O, and avowed
his ability, in ordinary prosperous times.
to sell the property on the London market
for e1O0O0o.0O0 or $500. 900, 900. In May. 1899.
Carnegie actually received in cash. and
bonus for his ninety days option to sell his
5Sh per cent. interest In this steel CON-
pany for s157, $50. 600. Frick's per cent, en-
that basis. would be worth sl6 5000
FRICK REFUSED TO SELL.
'Frick now alleges, right at the head of
this enormously successful business,
whereby, at least in part, he made for
Carnegie these enormous profits and val
ues, that Carnegie suddenly, and with
malevolent intent toward him, on Dec. T.
1899, arbitrarily demanded of him his resig-
nation as chairman. and this without any
reason except to crafty Carnegies malice.
Frick, in the interest of harmony, gave
his resignation and subsequently, and on
the 18th of January. 1900, after Carnegie
had thus deprived him of his office, he
n nOf fnl Anr,a I4I . r.1 n
Fricl) should sell to the firm his interest
in it at figure which would amount to
less than one-half of what this interest is
fairly worth. Frick refused to sell at that
price, but offered to sell and allow three
men to value the interest sold Carnegie
refused and left Frick, threatening him for
not yielding to his demand
Frick now alleges that after his resig-
nation and at the time of this last inter-
view Carnegie was fraudulently and secret
ly, without Frick's knowledge or consent,
attempting to carry out a scheme which,
If successful, would enable Carnegie, as
Carnegie hoped. to confiscate Frick's in
terest in the firm at probably not much
over SO per cent Of it's real value: that is.
say. not over ss.ooO.OOo for what, on the
2SS,0o0. This scheme, Frick says, he can
prove was to reinstate and make operative
an unexecuted and abandoned so-called
ironclad agreement of 1887 which related
solely to Carnegie Brothers & Co., limited,
and never did include the Carnegie Steel
Company. limited; and also to attempt to
make binding on Frick another so-called
ironclad 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 Car
negie knew. as Frick now alleges, was alb
solutely void in 1899, and yet Carnegie ap-
peared at a meeting of the board of man.
ayers of the Carnegie Steel Company. linn
tied, held Jan. 8, 1900, in Frick's absence,
and presented false and misleading resolu-
lions whereby he attempted to make
operative and reinstate the so-called IRON
clad agreement of 1887. and also directed
his copartners to sign the so-called agree
ment of 1852, which neither he nor any of
them had heretofore executed. All this,
it is alleged: Carnegie did secretly and pur-
posely to conceal the knowledge thereof
from Frick.
THE IRONCLAD AGREEMENT.
Carnegie was enabled to control his
partners because most of them still owed
che firm money for their interests, and,
Carnegie dominating the firm by major
ity interest. they were unwilling or unable
to withstand his demands. Carnegie in
duced some of his copartners to sign the
so-called agreement of 1892 and then with
out warning sprung upon Frick notice on
Jan. Is, 1900. which he has also caused his
copartners secretly to sign, and which was
based upon the pretended existence Of the
so-called ironclad agreement.
Carnegie followed this notice by COM
pelling on Feb. /, 1900, Schwab the presi-
dent Of the company. to transfer on the
books of the company all of Frick's inter-
est In the Carnegie Steel Company limited
to the said company, and he now pretends
that he (Carnegie) can practically dictate
to Frick the Value at which he will take
these interests. He claims that Frick Is
not entitled to anything for the good will
of the company, is not entitled to have
his interests valued as Of going concern
but that he (Carnegie) can use old and
obsolete figures which have stood on the
changed, so as to reduce the value OF
Frick's interests to the neighborhood, he
hopes, of about $4,000, ,OO0 As Carnegie owns
ssh per cent. Of the Carnegie Steel Com
pany. limited, he will, therefore, own more
than one-half of the per cent. which
Frick sells, and If he can thus acquire
per cent. of Frick's holdings for wha,
would amount TO about s3,O00.O00 he will
make a net profit off that transaction
alone, based on his own selling price, as
above stated, In the neighborhood of $1,000.
600.
THROUGH PERSONAL MALICE"
"Frick further says that never since 1sS'
had either firm attempted to force a part
ner TO sell. That no interest whatever
was ever acquired under the so-calleC
agreement of 1887, and none under the one
of 1892. except that at times when tho
financial condition and earning power OF
the company were radically different the
company did purchase the interests o.
three deceased partners, but by an amica
bic and satisfactory arrangement with the
representatives of each. Neither in the
history OF both firms was 1t ever supposed
that any partner had placed himself II
such a position that Carnegie could
through personal malice, force him from
the firm. and that for Carnegie to attemp
this in 1900. through the guise of proposed
agreements which looked TO the honor anS
well-being OF the firm, 10 crafty his per
r11OS VII nd