The Birmingham age-herald., 1902-06-03


 them. were adversely interested to the Ensey Land Company or acted other than bona fide and in their judgment to the best interests of the Ensley Land Company in declining to take action re- quested by compainants.
 Thirteenth-For that, 1t appears that the cause of suit asserted by complainantS is one, which if 1t exists at all. innures to them by reason of their interest as share holders in the Ensley Land Company and because of the allegal refusal of the Ensley Land Company to institute said suit, and 1t does not sufficiently appear that said suit, under the circumstances as stated in the bill, Is one which could or might be successfully maintained by the Ensley Land Company.
 Fourteenth-For that, 1t sufficiently ap- pears that the Ensley Land Company and it's stockholders have all the while had knowledge of the transactions complained of in the bill, and 1t appears that not only has said Ensley Land Company not taken affirmative action to obtain the re- lief sought by complainants in the bill, but that two separate Boards of the man aging directors of said company, with full knowledge of the facts have refused to take action, and that two meetings of the stockholders of said company have
 
 ings, at one of which meetings the pro- ceedings complained of were authorized and approved, and at the other of which said meetings the stockholders refused to authorize or allow any proceedings to be entered in the name of the said company to annul or yacate the same, and 1t does not appear but that said shareholders and managing directors acted according to their best judgment for the best inter ests Of the company, and that the refusal of said shareholders to allow said trans action to be opened and said suit to be instituted operated in effect as a ratifica- tion of the acts complained of in the bill
 Plaintiffs Small Interest. Fifteenth-And for that, complainants, as small minority stockholders of the Ensey Land Company, own a fraction over one two-hundred-and -fftieth interest in said company, by their bill seek to va cate, annul and set aside a certain deed executed by the Ensley Land Company to Bowron and Barker as trustees of date February 21 1898, and an acceptance ard declaration of trust executed by Barker and Bowron as trustees for the benefit of the Ensley Land Company and It's creditors. and three certain deeds exc cuted by Barker and Bowron, trustees.
 
 Company, of date February 24. 1898, one to defendants, Mccormack and Ramsay, of date February "A. 1898. one to defen- dants, Mccormack and Ramsay, of date July g. 1898. although it appears from the allegations of the bill that all tho lands of the Ensley Land Company were on the 25th day of January, 1S97 sold at sheriff's saie and conveyed to Mary E. Warner, executrix, the purchase at said sale under a valid judgment against the said Ensley Land Company and that there remained in said company after said sale only the statutory right of redemp- tion, and although 1t further appears from the allegations of the bill that other judgments In favor of other creditors had been rendered against said Ensley Land Company. and that said company at this time owed debts to various creditors ag- gregating s13o.oo0, and to provide for the payment of all of its creditors that the said company, acting by and through Its president, A. NJ. Shook, executed said deeds to said trustees and conveyed all the interest remaining in said company in said lands, the same being all the prop erty said company then owned, and being its statutory right of redemption in and to said lands, to said trustees for the benefit of all of its creditors, the creditors to be paid In the order of priority stated and set forth in the said trust agreement, which is made an exhibit to the bill. and which said trust was accepted by Bow which was submitted to and authorized
 sCnatInteI QiN&k