The San Francisco call., 1913-07-27
"Borax King Breaking ST.
lence, Says Partner, "Un-
able to Be Whole Thing"
Started Bankruptcy
BACKS TRUSTEES IN
WAR FOR CONTROL
Declares Capitalist Repudi-
ated Contract to Arbi-
trate Differences

+. NJ. Smith has broken the silence he
has maintained since his vast Interests
were thrown into the hands OF trus-
tees committee of San Francisco bank
ers last May. AS the trustees were
handling his affairs to his satisfaction
! he refrained from entering the contro-
versy in person, but yesterday he made
plain his own belief and intentions.
pushing aside the opinions of others as
, to what he really thought.
In brief, he declares that he stands
with the banker trustees and accuses
r. G. Hanford OF trying to force the
trustees to step down and turn over
he (Hanford) went to Europe to
finance the situation.
Smith states that he believes he con-
tributed more than his share TO the for
nation of the United Properties, and
| that the claim of the Hanford- Tevis in
contributions is unwarranted and in
equitable.
This, in addition to other differences
between the three partners led to his
| submission of the question to disin-
terested arbitrators. That was my
platform then and | have been stand
| ing on it ever since" he asserts.
"Hanford," he says, has persistently
repudiated his contract to arbitrate the
| differences. He had no part in the work
of that committee I owe him nothing
and he is not my creditor. Neverthe-
less he waited to control the affairs OF
the United Properties on his own terms.
He wanted the trustees of that COM
pany virtually to step down and out
and turn the whole thing over to him.
The idea was that for six months
these men were to be wiped off the
slate and Hanford was to be the whole
thing-a nice situation for my cred
itors, not to speak of myself
Smith declares his intention of full
and honorable payment of all his obli-
cations
II was solvent" he says, my credit
ors were amply. secured and all that
was necessary to work out the full
payment of my obligations to them was
the normal businesslike liquidation of
my property, which stood behind my
obligations"
SMITHS STATEMENT
His statement in full follows:
The other day r. G. Hanford filed
a petition in bankruptcy against me.
More precisely, the petition was hled
attaches of the Hanford- -Tevis office,
but Hanford can not deny and he now
confesses the paternity of this petition.
''The petition was not filed at the
instance of the genuine creditors; they
were not consulted, they were satisfied,
and they have reason to be satisfied,
with the present administration of my
affairs. / have done what any right
minded man would do under the cir
cumstances. ] was solvent, my credit
ors were amply secured, and all that
payment of my obligations to them
was the normal, bugsaesslike Hquida-
tion of my property, which stood be-
hind my obligations.
Il took that property and I put it in
the hands of men who would command
the confidence of nv creditors and of
the community, and / asked these men.
as trustees in the first instance for my
creditors, and only secondarily for my
self, to take hold of my estate and to
administer 1T, to the end that my cred
dollar.
CITES ABLE TRUSTEES
Everybody knows who these men
are Frank B. Anderson, president of
the Bank of California; John S. Drum
president of the Savings Union bank of
San Francisco; Mortimer Fleishhacker
president of the Anglo-California Trust
company; G. o. G. Miller, the we'll
known capitalist, and w. W. Garth
waite, president of the Oakland Bank
of Savings.
Would any man who had the i'm
terest of my creditors at heart have the
the hands Of men like these to throw
that property into bankruptcy, receiver
ships, litigation, delay, expense and inn
pairment. and does any creditor sup
to help him?
More than that, in January of this
year, the affairs of the United Prop
critics company passed under the ad-
ministration of three trustees. James
X. Moffitt, vice president of the First
National bank of San Francisco; Van.
derlyn STOW. president of Thomas Day
& Co. and William A. Bissell. assistant
traffic manager of the Santa Fe rail-
way and two attorneys. Gavin McNab,
representing the Hanford- -Tevis in
terests and W. l. Brobeck, representing
himself.
CONTRIBUTED HIS SHARE
There had been differences be-
tween the Hanford Tevis interests and
myself in respect to the properties to
be contributed to the United Proper
this is where the claim comes in that
I was obligated to turn in additional
railroad stock, but it was my conten-
tion that I had more than contributed
my share to the properties of the
United Properties company and that
the claim of the Hanford Tevis inter
ests that | should make further con-
trfbutions was unwarranted and in
equitable
"The existence of these differences
and my refusal to yield what believed
to be an unjust and unfounded claim
led to an agreement on my part to sub
NIT my differences with the Hanford-
Tevis interests to disinterested arbitra-
tors, who should resolve all questions
between us on the basis of what was
natural, equitable and just between the
parties under all the circumstances
That was my platform then and l have
been standing on it ever since.
This agreement to arbitrate our diff
ferences was confirmed and renewed
over the signatures of Hanford and
Continued on Page 20. Column