East Oregonian : E.O. (Pendleton, OR) 1888-current, 1911-01-19
Further Suit Filed in Circuit
Court by Attorneys for Fur
niSh Element.
SUIT BROUGHT TO
COLLECT SUM OF $125,OOO
Attorneys I'm Complaint Charge Misap-
preparation OF Funds Against Col
onizer OF Furnish Project - Coe
Had Admitted Part OF shortage.

There was a new development in
the famous Furnish-Coe controversy
this afternoon when suit was filed in
the local circuit court by Attys. C. w.
Fulon and Raley & Raley for the
Inland Irrigation company, the Fur
nish Ditch company and w. j. Fur
nish against Henry w, Coe, the Co
lumbia Land company and other par
ties as nominal defendants in order to
make up the issue. The complaint is
a lengthy affair, covering 1913 pages
of closely typewriter matter In
brief the suit Is for the collection Of
$126,000 and alleges that Coe and
the Columbia company were short in
their collections made on sales Of
lands and water rights of the Inland
Irrigation company, while Coe was
acting as agent, and II calls for an
accounting by Coe and the Columbia
Land company to the Inland Irriga-
ton company and TO the Hibernia
Savings Bank OF Portland which was
the trustee named under the bond is
sue.
The complaint sets forth the orig
inal contracts between the plaintiffs
and the defendants and afterwards
sets forth numerous violations and
breaches Of the contract by Coe and
his sub-agent. the Columbia company.
The peculiar showing made by the
complaint is one to the effect that
bonds were issued on the properties Of
the Inland Irrigation company to the
extent OF s2S0,OO0 and that of these
bonds, w. j. Furnish was holder OF
$3.50, 900 and other parties of the re-
naming $4,000 and that under the
contracts Coe was to sell the lands
and water rights and pay all proceeds
Of such sales to the Hibernia Savings
bank, which institution should there
after pay interest on the bonds after
paying to Coe commission Of 25 per
cent of such sales for his services as
agent Coe claims to have sold about
100000 worth of the property but,
Il is alleged, has turned over to the
trustee sufficient money only to re-
deem $4,000 OF the bonds and that
Furnish still holds s235,000 Of such
bonds.
1t is complained that Coe misap-
propriated funds and applied them to
his own use in the building up OF
Stanfield, Hermiston and other prop
critics not in any manner connected
with the Furnish project. II is fur
ther charged that on july Z, 1910,
the plaintiffs discovered a misappro-
priation on the part of Coe and call
ed upon him for an accounting and
that at that time Coe admitted he
was s103.091.S1 short in his accounts,
but that since that time the plaintiffs
have discovered far greater short
age than admitted.
1t is further charged that Coe had
taken large number Of notes aggre-
eating $4,000 or $4,000 for back
payments on land sold and had taken
such notes in the name Of the Co
lumbia Land company instead of the
Inland Irrigation company, and that
instead of turning the notes over to
the trustee for redemption of he
bonds, applied them to his own use.
A large number of such notes are
cited and It is alleged that the Sean
dinavian American bank of Portland
and other banks now mold such notes.
The list of these notes with the
amounts are set out
1t is also charged that Coe made
many deals whereby he received q
commission and profits on the lands
Of the Inland Irrigation company.
That he concealed from the company
and that he applied these funds to
his own use. An-extended list of such
instances is made.
Cnl
further charged with numerous acts
of fraud and deception which are set
out in full in the complaint with the
dates, amounts and parties being CIV
en- in each instance.