The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1902-06-29

Company offered to purchase from the
In exchange for the s,Sonsoltdat COM
pany bonds. bearing Aterest at per
cent, at the rate of two bonds for one
share. 500 pars3value, of the common
stock OF the. American Tobacco Company
and one bond for one share, 500 par
value OF the common stock OF the Con-
unental Company.
All Of the stockholders, excepting
those holding 1900 shares of the Anerl-
can Tobacco Company, and even a lar
ger proportion of the Continental To-
bacco Company accepted the offer and
exchanged their stock for bonds.
Most Of these 1900 shares were then
assembled into a pool or syndicate on
behalf of which four suits had been
brought. which, from one standpoint or
another, attack the validity of the Con-
solidated Tobacco Company's offer to
purchase
Most of the persons interested in this
pool are also connected with the Uni
versai Tobacco Company, organized by
Messrs. Cochran, William Butler, and
others as a rival of the American To-
bacco Company in April, 1901 and the
suits which have been brought are all
under the direction or control of Mr..
Cochran and his associates. one of whom
at least is a gentleman we'll known III
strike litigation.
In the suit first brought, that Of Davis
VS.. The Consolidated Tobacco Company
and others. obtained an order foH
Davis's examination. which the court
sustained on motion to yacate. After
appealing from the decision, Darts with
in the past few days has obtained eS-
parte an order TO discontinue his suit.
which order | am about to set aside.
II he does not escape examination RI, a
discentinuance, shall probably be able
to show lust how and why and by whom
the combination of outstanding shares
was formed as the result Of Which
Davis was put forward as the frstl
plaintiff.
The second suit is brought by Mr.. Mum
ford, q. lawyer who never owned any
share OF stock in the American Tobacco
Company. except some purchased for
him By his broker on margin and after
ward exchanged for bonds. Before the
suit was commenced the bonds were
sold at a profit. Mr.. Munford now owns
neither bonds nor stock.
The third suit Is brought by George
Butler. a brother Of William II. Butler,
the president OF the Universal Tobacco
Company.
Tie fourth suit is brought by Mr..
Cochran, himself. in the name of a rel
alive. Mrs. Susan K. Zines. The plain
tiff does not appear even to know Of the
existence of the suit. the affidavit Upon
which the order for examination, was
granted being sworn to by Mr.. Cochran.
In the last two suits those brought by
Butler and Zines, about fortnight ago,
Mr.. Cochran obtained at Special Term.
Fart II, two orders to examine Messrs.
Duke and Ryan, on the ground that
their examination was necessary to ena-
hlc him to frame n complaint in both
suits. Tho papers upon which these or
ders were granted contained a number
of charges of fraudulent mismanage-
nicnt on the part of the directors of the
American Tobacco Company. all based
upon information and belief only. For
many reasons it was deemed unnecessary
TO move to vacate the orders upon aft
darits denying the numerous false and
stan6alous accusations contained in the
afl3avits upon which the orders were
granted. 1t was thought sufficient for the
prsent to point cut the fatal Imperfect
tons in the papers themselves.
Among other grounds for vacating the
Q, tlers. I stated to the court that the al
legations upon information and belief
witt, no sources of information or grounds
OF belief stated might amount to q
charge of criminal conspiracy and on that
groInd alone they should be vacated III
! acct rdance with the numerous decisions
Upon the subject with which know you
are familiar. In other words. argued
that plaintiff cannot make series OF
reckless charges upon informa tian and
belief, and then require the defendants
TO Re examined to prove them.
he defendants put themselves In the
attitude OF de:!lurring to the sufliciency
of the allegations to sustain the orders.
If Mr.. Cochran thinks that because we
eemurred to the papers we admitted
their contents to be true. except for the
pl rr.pses of the motion, he shows that
no has forgotten those elementary prin-
ciries of procedure with which every
| Law student is familiar.