The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1900-12-27
WILL CONSIDER /.
Justice Blanchard Reserves
Decision in Johnson Case.
DETROIT ROADS INVOLVED
History of the Case Shows
Peculiar TangIe,

New York, Dec 26-Decision was re-
served by Justice Blanchard in the su-
preme court today In an action brought
by Tom /. johnson against P T. VIII
son & Co., bankers and brokers, for an
injunction restraining the defendants
from dispozng Of the stocks and securi-
ties of the Detroit street railway system,
pending the trial Of q suit for the disso-
luton of an alleged partnership existing
between Johnson and R. T Wilson &
co. Mr.. johnson also asks that a re-
ceiver be appointed for the railroad.
The origin Of the suit was the pur-
chase in 1894, by the defendants, Of the
Detroit street railway system, after
which Mr.. Johnson became associated
with its management.
R. T. Wilson & Co. began the purchase
Of the concern in the fall of 1894, and af-
ter they had succeeded in 50 doing they
brought in Mr.. johnson as an associate
in January, 1895. He was to have one
fifth interest in the company of all
stocks purchased or to be purchased by
r. T. Wilson & Co. in connection with
the carrying out Of the project for the
consolidation OF all the surface roads in
and about Detroit. Mr.. Johnson also was
to have charge of the working of the diff
ferent roads acquired and was to act
as president Of the company at a sal
airy of $4,000 a year r. T. Wilson & Co
were to have the management Of the fin
Al cot
were to form such syndicates and out
side arrangements with regard to the Sc
curities as they deemed fit The contract
between Johnson and R. T. Wilson &
Co. was to terminate within three years
If possible but did not so terminate and
was extended from time to time until
November last. The reason Of the fail
ure to close the agreement was thu for
nation of a new company for the ac-
quirement of the Detroit railroad sys-
TEN, which was known as the Three
Cent Fare combination, which was eng1-
neered by the firm Of Pack & Everitt,
who secured a franchise on making a
stipulation that they would carry pas
sengers for a three-cent fare, and who
succeeded in acquiring between fifty and
sixty miles Of streets under that fran
crise.
The scheme Of Pack & Everitt serious
" interfered with the plans laid down
by R T. Wilson & Co, and they made
a settlement with Pack & Everitt where
by Pack &, Everitt agreed to deposit 70
per cent worth of stock in the three
cent fare company and were to receive
in return certain stocks in a new COM
pany to be organized under the laws Of
Michigan. Pack & Everitt, however, did
not deposit the full amount Of 20 per
cent of the stocks in the thee-cent fare
company, and the question Of the ball
ance was made a basis of negotiations
as was also the amount r. T. Wilson &
Co. should pay for the stock already
deposited. These negotiations continued
until the middle Of November last, and
on November q an arrangement was
made between r T. Wilson and Pack &
Everitt Mr. Johnson claims that he on
November II orally gave notice that he
wanted his share of the securities and
that he would pay his one-ffth share
Of the outlay by Wilson & Co., in their
purchase, the amount expended being
over 100000.
R. T. Wilson & Co. deny that Johnson
gave any notice that he desired a dis
solution Of the alleged partnership prior
to the making of the Pack & Everitt
agreement They admit that in the begin
ming of December he did give a written
notice demanding that the partnership
be dissolved.
Wilson & co. paid 100000 for the pur-
chase Of the roads acquired by them,
but say that johnson has not paid his
one-ffth of that sum and cannot there
fore claim the one-ffth of the securities.
Johnson's reply to this IS that he offered
TO pay it and was ready to DO so at any
time. and that he is. therefore, entitled
to receive the one-ffth Of the stock con-
templated in his agreement Of 1885. The
injunction asked for by him calls for
the restraining Of the carrying out Of the
Pack & Everitt agreement settled on by
r. T Wilson & Co. as wei as debarr-
ing the transfer Of the securities held
by the defendants.
Justice Blanchard win not render his
decision until ne has received briefs from
counsel on both sdes on the law on the
case,