The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1904-03-12
WIRELESS COMPANY
is IN MORE TROUBLE
Stockholders Refuse to Ratify Agreement With
Waterhouse Trust Co.---DeIinquent Stock
Will Not Be Sold at Auction Today.

The trustee is to receive 1856. sc per
month, for office rent, bookkeeping and
services. and is also to have a member
on the board of directors, and to get a
mortgage on the entire property of the
Inter-Island Telegraph Co. There can
be no change in the directors while the
agreement is in force.
I Mr.. Davies moved that the agreement
be ratified, and he was seconded by r.
C. Brown.
Mr.. Thompson said that the agree
ment could not be ratified, that it gave
to the Waterhouse Trust Co.. the duties
of the treasurer, and the powers of the
directors and was contrary to the by
laws. He also commended that it could
MT be passed unless the bylaws were
repealed as the directors We're given
general management of the company.
He said that while he believed the Wa
terhouse Trust Co. should be secured;
as it had bridged the chasm between
poverty and possible prosperity yet he
did not believe it should be given all
the rights and duties of the stockhold-
ers.
Mr.. Trent replied that the Water
house Trust Co. had been acting under
the agreement in good faith and had
faithfully performed its part of the
contract. The Inter-Island Telegraph
Co. now had overdrawn its account to
the amount of $4,000, and he believed
the stockholders were supreme to act
as they wished and ratify this agree
ment. If there was majority against
the ratification of the agreement, the
Waterhouse Trust Co. wanted to know
it at once as they were vitality inter-
ested in the matter. He did not be-
lieve Mr. Thompson's point was wen
taken, as the Board of Directors had
delegated what authority it had to the
Waterhouse Trust 90. Nothing was
done without first obtaining action by
the directors. The trust company had
a mortgage as well as the agreement,
and had advanced $500 showing its
good faith. If the stockholders wished
to throw the company down, the Wa
terhouse Trust Co. would like to know
it. While the company did not insist
upon ratification. it did insist upon
some action on this matter, and also
that the objects for which the meeting
was called be carried out.
Thompson said there was an added
objection to considering the agreement,
namely, that it had not been mention
ed in the call for the meeting.
Mr. Thompson said he had only the
highest commentator for the way the
Waterhouse Co. had carried on the
company commercially, and that he
had no disposition to cut out their
security, but he didn't think it fair
that the concern which had the COM
pany in hook, should have the entire
management and control. He said
that the company could be secured
without taking away the rights of the
stockholders, and that portion of the
agreement could be approved and GER
tain portions should be rejected. as
pernicious-
r. c. Brown moved that the bylaws
be suspenueu and the agreement rati-
fed. Mr.. Davies seconded the motion
Mr.. Thompson was asked for an opin-
ion as to whether this could be done,
but said he wouldn't want to give a
legal opinion as it might seem biased,
but he intended to vote against it. He
raised the point of order that there |
was a motion before the house, and |
Davies then withdrew his previous |
motion for the ratification of the agree |
ment The vote on the motion to sus- |
pend the bylaws was then taken, |
Cross, Thompson, Campbell and Nc
Claim holding a majority of the stock |
present, voting against it.
Cross then moved to adjourn until /
Tuesday at $3.50 o'clock, which was
carried.