Gilpin observer., 1910-01-06

option upon the property, and went
on to Wilkes-Barre, and the five
directors met and came to the con
clusion, I suppose, that as Mr.. Ell
lott owned this interest in the com
pany, he ought to have a representa-
tion, so they agreed among them
selves they would have six directors,
instead of five, and were advised by
their attorney that it would make no
difference, that they might amend
their bylaws and make it all right,
and thereupon the bylaws were
amended, and Mr.. Elliott was elected
a director. He sat with the board
and acted at that meeting in Septem-
Der. Nothing further was done until
January, 1881, when Mr.. Elliott again
went east in reference to getting a
lease and bond for the property and
offered the company, as | recall, $25,-
900 for all the property, of the com
pany, and temper cent royalty. On
objection being made that this was
less than the property was sold for,
his statement was that the property
was all worked out, no ore was in
sight, as there had been when he had
sold it,ard it was not known whether
the property was of any value or not,
and for property whieh had, apparent
ly, no value, that was sufficient
price. may say, in passing. that
this was the only testimony as to
the value of the property at this or
any subsequent period.
''The company at that time decid-
ed not to accept this offer. Mr. FL
lott stayed there, and on the fifth
Of February, 1881, they held another
meeting and decided it was about
time to have stockholders meeting,
which they proceeded to call for the
10th day OF February, 1881. The rec
ords do not show that any notice
was given. AS a matter of fact, nc
meeting was held on the 10Th day o.
February, 1881, no meeting was held
in pursuance of the notice, ii any
was given; but on February 22nd,
think it was, four or five men had q
stockholders meeting, and thereupon
| they elected the salGc six directors
all of them being unanimously elect
ed. The meeting then adjourned. Jan
/ 2lst, 1891, was the next meeting
of the board-a called meeting. There
/ were present at that meeting but two
directors, the two Hutchinsors. Mr.
Reynolds, one of the other directors
4 had died. and his son, who was one
OF the heirs, apparently, appeared
, Mr., Rrown, who was one Of tbs
directors, had died. and Mr.. Chase
appeared as the attorney in fact Of
one of the Brown heirs. Thereupor
the two Hutchinsons, believing thai
the board should be filled, elected Mr.
/ Reynolds, Jr., and Mr.. Chase as tive
directors, neither of them being &
stockholder. They acted and held one
meeting, in 1891. There was some
!
and the directors there present
agreed to raise the money and re
deem the property, which had been
I sold for taxes, which they did, and
it was redeemed for the benefit OF
the company, as all their acts had
been honestly done, apparently. Nc
/ further meeting was held until Feb
ruary, 1900, when Mr.. Chase, one OF
these directors, elected by the two
Hutchinsons, suggested that as the
corporation was about TO expire, and
he was not familiar with the laws OF
Colorado, they ought to do something
to save the property and thereupon
1t was resolved that the property be
conveyed to James c. Hutchinson
and Chase, as trustees, for the use
and benefit of the stockholders of the
company. Thereupon they executed a
deed to these two trustees. which
was recorded In March, 1900 By this
time Mr.. Bonnell had died. Mr. Ell.
lott had notice of this deed in 1902.
From 1902 to 1908 Mr.. Hutchinson
was quite active, individually, In try.
ing to sell. lease and dispose of this
property. He came out here and made
several leases upon different por
tions of the property. which We're, ap.
parently, unproduatiye; anyway, all
cf them We're abandoned. In 1907 he
was out here, and met Mr.. Charles
o. Richards. one of the defendants in
this case. He had mot him before but
at that time he told him that he
wanted to get rid Of this property, or
dispose OF 1t IN some way; that he
could not get any price for 1t; that
RlchardH wing wnrklnr ON the Chase