The Butte inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1901-1912, 1901-09-19
BASIN & BAY STATE COMPANY
It Runs UP Against Glass Brothers
Once More-Latter Charge
Forgery.

The Basin and Bay State Mining conn
rany. born in Jefferson county. mas en-
coun,sred another legal snag in its eN-
istence and it may be some time before
the obstacle can be removed. or the
snag the Basin Progress says:
Another suit has grown out OF the
controversy between a. J. and James
Glass against the Basin and Bay State
Mining company In regard to the >ex-
rUlson of the plaintiffs from the man
agement of the company. This Is an
effort to invalidate the proceedings of
the stockholders meeting held April %.
at Basin. at which the issue of $300,000
bonds was authorized. on the ground
that forged proxies were used. The de-
PENDANTS are f. p. Chaplin. Darwin Almy.
James Tillinshast. Irving Champln.
Thomas A. Buell.. George +. Keith F. 4.
Doten. James I. Able, Charles c. Lewis
and A. Il. Longley. who We're elected
officers OF the company at subsequent
meeting of directors at Boston.
1T is charged in the complaint filed in
the district court at Boulder that proxies
given by large number of eastern
stockholders for use at a meeting to be
held November IA. 1900 were changed
and voted at the meeting in April. The
alleged forgery consists in change of
the wording of the proxy. so that instead
OF reading that it gave the holder power
TO vote at the meeting of the stock
holders" to be held November IA it read ::
TO vote at any meeting of the stock
Folders"
The allegation is that these proxies
We're originally given to Mr. Chaplin and
that he it is alleged. changed them and
49, c>, ~,
self and the various other defendants as
trustees for the purpose of obtaining
control of the company and of defeating
The rights Of the plaintiffs and other de-
PENDANTS. II is stated that there are out
standing 9,0S9 shares of stock. a majority
of which is necessary to constitute a
quorum. and that MI. Chaplin voted these
proxies for $3.50 shares. Therefore it is
claimed. without the proxies. the trustees
named could not have been elected.
The complaint goes on to say that.
TO carry out the nefarous and fraudu-
lent acts the defendants recorded pur-
ported mortgage OF the company's prop
erty at Basin July % for 100000: and
that the defendants named held a pre-
tended meeting as a board of trustees
at Boston and elected several of their
number officers and executive committee.
1T is claimed that all Mr.. Chaplin s
acts 1t the stockholders meeting are void.
that the board of trustees issfraudulent
and it's election void; that it never had
any right to meet in Boston or any other
city as a board of trustees and that all
it's acts are void. 1t is also alleged that
all the proceedings of the -bord of trus-
tees are void. because it has not kept
copies of its minutes at it's principal
office at Basin.
1T is asked that the acts of Mr. Cha pin
and the other defendants in procuring
their election to office by the fraudulent
use of the proxies be adjadged "a fraud
on the plaintiffs and other stockholders
and therefore void that the proceedings
o: the meeting of April 2Snbe set aside
and cancelled and that the company be
ordered to erase those proceedings from
it's records: that the defendants be or
dered not to act as officers in any re-
spect: and that at the final hearing a
perpetual Injunction be issued to that
effect"