The Detroit times., 1908-08-14

mdlnueT charged 10 the BeueTdl &c
count OF Cameron Currie & Co.
This explains why there has been
such difficulty by customers OF the
brokerage firm in getting their stocks
the past few months. When Cameron
Currie K Co. got in deep water, II was
increasingly hard To release stocks
held by banks in Boston which had
loaned the money TO Hayden. Stone d
Co. 10 perfect the margin purchases.
The important bearing OF the whole
matter Is In It's effect on the question
OF ownership OF the securities. Had
the stocks been purchased outright
with the identical purchase price paid
by the customer. there could be small
question as to their ownership. but,
being purchased by Cameron Currie q
Co. on margin and charged TO general
account, IL will remain for the courts
TO decide whether the title ever passed
from Hayden, Stone & Co, and these
creditors are likely to find themselves
in the same boat with the people who
bought on margins In a purely specula-
tive way and with redress only in
rlaims against the general fund.
The entire mass of dealings with
Hayden. Stone & Co. will have To be
gone into TO determine whether GER
tain specific stocks were ever released
by payments made TO complete their
purchase price.
When court convened Attorney F.
w, Stevens. for the receiver. read the
order dissolving the injunction
against the sale of the stocks held by
Hayden. Stone e. Co. Ronald Kelly,
Ormond F. Hunt, James o. Muffin and
others Immediately put in objections
and wanted the order modified to ex-
cept the stocks which. 1t is claimed.
were purchased in full.
Judge Mandelps Questions.
Judge Mandell asked two questions
rs there any statement under oath
that Cameron Currie 4 Co. did not
owe $l,300.000 to Hayden, Stone &
Coz"
lis II denied, under oath, that these
stocks were pledged as security"
None OF the attorneys could success
fully controvert these two points and
the court reviewed the progress of
the case. saying that he had felt he
had moral although not strong
the securities until the case took form.
He could not allow speculation by the
receiver longer In the assets OF the
brokerage firm as a falling market
might wipe out every bit OF equity in
the holdings.
George s. Field asked that the In
junction be continued until Aug. %.
and that answer be made by Hayden,
Stone q Co. on the previous day, Aug.
81. His clients would suffer loss by
the sale OF their stocks at this time,
and wanted their stock instead of
money.
James o. Murfin, representing Is
petitioners, declared that some of his
client wanted to peculate and want.
ed to hold their stocks for rise in
prices, instead of taking the money
now.
You cannot order the receiver or
anyone else to sell our property" ar
gued Murfin. Until the right OF
all have been established, the court
has no right TO make such an order"
Frederick II. Warren, F. Fl. Can
field, Thomas Hislop and others ar
gued to the same effect.
In response to question from the
court, the receivers counsel stated
that the stocRc claimed by creditors
who have paid in full are worth $780,
900. while other stocks which are
also claimed by customers amount 10
about half the holdings In the hands
OF Hayden, Stone & Co. If the sale
OF all these were restrained. IL would
leave but 100000 worth to sell as
against the claim of Hayden, Stone
& Co. for $1,300,000. leaving nothing
for the general fund.
Eldredge S. Bacon and William B.
Cady took sides with Murfin against
an immediate sale but the court did
not take their view OF It.
Much Opposition to Sale.
Robson was practically the only
lawyer except counsel for the receiver
and Hayden. Stone & Co., who favor
ed the sale