New-York tribune., 1909-06-13
MINES OWNERS AT ODDS
PARTNERS CHARGE FRAUD
Suit InUo1Ues Large Properties IN
Nora Scotia.

Through the denial by the Appellate Division Of
the Supreme Court of a motion by Philip H Moore.
of Bridgewater, n S, for permission to examine
the books and papers of J. Thomas Reinhardt. a
curb broker, at No. IS Broad street, there is
vealed interesting suit against the latter, in
volving the capitalization of two mining properties,
in which Moore makes charges of fraud and Rein
hardt makes counter charges of similar character
The shareholders VIII be particularly interested in
the action
The plaintiff says that tho defendant failed to
make an accounting for S25o,CoO from the sale OF
shares in the companies in which they we're nu-
tually interested. and that Reinhardt charged him
with commissions for wash sales while the lat
says Moore falsely represented him that the
Micmac Mining Company and the Leipizgate
Mining Company. the properties involved had paid
good dividends Reinhardt charges misrePresenta-
ton also in that Moore, he says, told him he was
Harvard graduate. with the degree of mining en-
gineer, whereas Reinhardt says he learned Moore
had taken only course in mechanic drawing and
rudimentary mathematics.
Moore says that he entered into a contract with
Reinhardt for the marketing of the Mining stock
the profits TO be divided equally. Reinhardt was To
make a final accounting on October 28, 1909. Ao-
cordng TO Moore, his partner in the venture re-
fused furnish him with summary statement
of sales of stock and failed for S25o000 worth OF
shares In his suit in the Supreme Court for an
accounting the plaintiff says there has peeh d
breach of contract.
The Mcmac mine and the Leip-z -zgate mine were
Nova Scotian gold properties. Moore consolidated
the two under the laws Of Nova Scotia and op-
tanned option from the owners, 10 whom
he agreed TO pay $4,000 in monthly instalnents or
s. go each Reinhardt was to market the stock 10
obtain this money. He was also, it Is alleged 10
compile a monthly statement of sales Reinhardt
made payments up TO August % 1905 when
payments stopped. Moore says. The latter then
charges:
For purposes of wiping out plaintiffs shares
and profits Reinhardt made bogus or wash sales
of shares to himself and other brokers acting in
collusion with him
The plaintiff says that the defendant charged
him commission on these sales According to Rein
hardts account. there were 10725s shares sold but
Moore says he learned that the sales the curb
amounted s2,262 632. In other words, the stock
under options he charges, was sold and resold
twenty-one times. There is another item for $o4-
$50 10 for commission charged, which according 10
the complaint also paid in bogus sales. There
is also a mysterious $4,000 item for expenses and
disbursements. OF which Reinhardt in an affidavit
says IL would be 'unwise' TO disclose the exact
items. He says that he dealt in lT77l55 shares IN
all on the market. representing A1e4506. Moore
says that Reinhardt bought l0 5s shares under op-
ton at s. q share As 20 the $4,000 item which
Reinhardt said 1t would be 'unwse' to specify
counsel for Moore says in an affidavit.
The fact that the defendant had many charges
and expenses Of such nature that It would be
unfair 10 his associate and improper 70 itemize
and specify is clear evidence that he was ndulgns
IN practices disowned by stock exchanges and le-
gitimate business methods
The NIicmac Electric Company, Limited was or
ganized also. and Moore says that Relnhardt re
ceived unfair profits OF &3s.Te from the sale Of
bonds for this concern. Moore has issued "a cir
cuar in which he says sanguirely that he VIII
apply every dollar he collects in his suit against
Reinhardt the payment OF dividends on the STOCKS
and bonds Of the electric compar--
ReinhaTdt. in his counter suit for $1,000 against
Moore gays that the latter is guilty + fraud, be
cause he represented that the mining properties
had paid good profits whereas The Micmac paid
little and the Leipizgate nothing He says he paid
out $500 for electric power in The mines which
was never used for the purpose. and the mines
we're operated at loss
The Appellate Division refused 70 grant moore
permission TO see Renhardts books. as he had not
vet obtained an interlocutory decree I'm hts action
for an accounting.