Arizona weekly journal-miner., 1902-10-08
tCOBRE GRANDE
 LITIGATION Judge SIOan's Decision Denying Motion for Receiver Opens Avenue for New Lit
 igption. An Appeal From the Decision Will Be Taken and al Same Time New Suits Will Be Instituted
 on Other Lines.

pensive litigation over the valuable Cananeas mines might now be con sidered as ended.
 That hope it seems was prema ture, for Messrs. Hawkins & Wilson attorneys for the plaintiffs, have talk en the initial steps towards anap peal from that decision and are un derstood to have advised their client, that the courts last decision only opens the way to more direct rem edy than that which the appointment of receiver would have given the plaintiffs. The original idea of tht plaintiffs evidently was that the courts receiver might prosecute the claims of the old Cobre Grande Cop, per Company to this mining prop. erty now held by the Greene Consol dated company and recover the same for the stockholders and creditors oi the Cobre Grande; but this round about proceeding, the court in it's opinion just handed down, declares to be unnecessary, and under that ruling the way is apparently opened for direct attack upon the title tc the Cobre Grande mines by the stock holders themselves.
 The decision, which covers about fifteen typwritten pages, contains au exhaustive review of the facts in this remarkable controversy, and though the average layman may be pardonecl for not at once grasping its full eff. feet, he will find close reading of the same very instructive; it will show him how subtle thing the law car be in its actual administration and how easy it is for a litigant who thinks he has won victory to find himself on the wrong side of the fence. The judge recapitulates the facts familiar to all who have fol. lowed the course of this litigation; the organization of the Cebre GEande Copper Company in 1899 and its purchase and possession of what was then and now is believed to be among the greatest copper mines in the world, said to contain untold mil. lions of ore; the forcible seizure of this property in October, 1899, by the defendant Greene and his associ. ates; the suit brought by the officers of the Cobre Grande Copper Com pany, under the leadership of E. B Gage, its then president, to recover its property; how the litigation ex. tended into New York and other states in struggles over the product of the mines when shipped abroad the combination of stockholders in order to maintain the suits against Greene into d pool controlled by Gage; and finally the famous coup of December 12th, 1900, by which Greene bought out the pool and by the bargain between him and Gage as trustee and president, got control at once both of the officers of the Cobre Grande Copper Company and of the actions against himself which that company had brought. The suits to recover the mines were got rid of in one way ol another without difficulty, Mir. Greene being now really at the same time both plaintiff and defendant, and Messrs. Hallenborg, Addicks and other minority stockholders were left out in the cold. Upon hearing this Hallenborg, who owned about 5000 shares of stock and who had ad- vanced about S50,000 in the shape of drafts from New York to fight the com pany's battles against Greene, was particularly incensed and immedi- ately brought this suit on behalf of himself and others in like plight, asking to have receiver appointed by the court, who under the author ity of the court could attack all these so-called fraudulent transactions The judge in his decision, after grouping ali these facts in a masterly manner, takes up the point made by the defense that the suit originally brought by the Cobre Grande Cop per Company against Greene for the recovery of its property was decided against it by Judge Street, upon the merits, in 1901. But this defense is disposed of by showing that at the very time of that decision the Cobre Grande Copper Company was in con- trol of the defense in that action, having. obtained that control under the very agreement complained of as fraudulent, the plain inference being that the decision of Judge Street was not bona fide adjudication.
 Judge Sloan, in his present decis- ion, says that it is unnecessary fol him to pass upon the merits of the controversy. He declines therefore to say whether the facts as set forth constituted fraud upon the minor ity stockholders or whether the for, mer decision by Judge Street in favor of Greene was valid or binding, but it is pretty evident from the way +he judge states the facts that while he eXonerates some of the defendant: from actual fraudulent intent. ht considers that the whole transaction has very fishy look.
 The court refuses to appoint q re ceiver partly because there is noth, ing to receive, the unfortunate com pany having been stripped of every dollar it had in the world, the cour pointing out with fine irony tha there Is not even enough left to pay the expenses of a receivership. 1 more important reason, however, anC one which seems to us to contain the point of the whole decision, i that the plaintiffs may now main
 tain their action directly to set asid
 all these transactions. The cour says:
 "The law is well settled that a mi
 nority stockhoider may maintain an
 suis which the corporation of whic
 he is such a stockholder might main
 tain for the purpose of preserving 0
 enforcing the rights of such com
 pany against other persons, where i
 appears that the board of director,