The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1909-10-21
MUST ANSWER CHARGES

Of Complaint Brought by Former
Partner-Claim of DupIicity and
Fraud Made.
Brattleboro, Oct. 15.--The troubles
of william II. Proctor and the Hook
err, Co"ser & Mitchell Company, of
which he is the president, are again
before the public, this time the conl-
pany appearing in litigation with
James F. Hooker, William H. Corser
and Charles d. Whitaker, the last
three named being FORMER partners
in the overall concern.
The troubles of Messrs. Proctor,
Hooker, Corser and Whitaker did
not end with their withdrawal from
the firm and the purchase of the stock
by Mr.. Proctor This week has seen
another start with increased vigor
in the difficulties between the par
ties, and yesterday afternoon the
trouble reached a head, when Proc
tor scored another point, the Hook
er, Corser G. Mitchell Company at
taching the property of Mr.. Hooker
Mr.. Corser and Mr. Whitaker for
$4,000 on a writ of sequestration or
dered by Judge Alfred A. Hall, of st.
Adams, in the court of chancery. At
tachment was made by Deputy Sher-
if A. W. ]. wilkins, the writ being
issued from the Office of Clarke C.
Fits on a bill of complaint.
The difficulties have grown out Of
the attitude of the defendants tow
ards the Hooker, Corser G Mitchell
Company and Mr. Proctor in their es-
tablishment of the Mohawk Overall
Company, new concern, in Schen-
ectady, N. Y, using their capacities as
directors of the Brattleboro Com
pany, so the latter claims, to wrong
fully depreciate the value of the
stock and performing other acts
which the company claims were H.
legal. This latest phase of the case
probably means another sharp cou-
test in the court, and as many of the
principals have removed to Schen-
ectady, many dispositions may have
to be taken.
AS an introduction to the bill of
complaint, it is stated that on Feb.
10, Pre- tor filed in the Court of
Chancery bill Of complaint against
the defendants, alleging certain acts
and plans to injure the company and
defraud him as a shareholder, and
that while the litigation was pending
an option was given to both parties
on give and take proposition where
by Mr. Proctor was to either sell his
interest in the firm or take over the
interest of the other parties. Mr..
Proctor finally bought all Of the cap
ital stock of the defendants, this
same stock afterwards being divided
among the new stockholders of the
firm. Mr.. Proctor, H. r. Brown, w. c..
Mitchell, j. B. Martin and Clarke c.
Fits.
4e company also makes other al
legations concerning alleged duplc
ity on the part of the defendants in
trying to injure the Hooker, Corser x
Mitchell Company, many of these
allegations being contained in previ-
Gus bills which have been brought by
Mr.. Proctor against Mr.. Hooker, MI.
Corser and Mr.. Whitaker Mr. Proc
tor maintains that secret negotiations
were in progress while he was a
stockholder in the company relative
to the establishment of new plant
in Schenectady, and that many of
the employees of the company were
taken or sent to Schenectady as re-
suit of these negotiations, thus tend
ing to injure the local business. He
made demand for all information
considering the proposed change in
assertion of his rights as stock
holder, but that these rights have
been refused him and that the in
formation is still being withheld.
He also claims that the defendants
while acting as directors of the local
company, secured a bonus of from
$1,000 to $4,000 for locating in
Schenectady, and that from their &C.
tions, the local company should ben
eft in so far as it sees fit to elect
the benefits. The company also
claims that these negotiations were
entered into, while the defendants
were directors of the company, while
they declare that the negotiations
were made as individuals and not as
directors. The orator, claims that
their work is specified intention to
defraud him of his rights as a stock
holder in the company and that it
tends to depreciate the value of the
stock. He also AYERS that the defend
ants took plans and drawings of the
machinery and other works at tn :
company's plant to Schenectady and
that they are to use them in the es-
adjustment of their new business,
and that they wrongfully took $1,000 =
SO from the treasury of the company
to pay the expenses of previous liti-
cation, this sum being used, not for
the hnnafit of tho nratnr hut for th q