Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1914-11-26
DR.. WEBB LOSES SUIT
Must Pay $240,000, According
to Referee Hamilton Odell.
Result of Deal Made when shclburne
Man Was President of the Rut-
land Rniiroad-Anothcr Suit
to Follow.

Judgment of approximately $4,000
against Dr. W. Seward Webb of Shell
burne Farms is recommended In the
opinion Of Referee Hamilton Odell OF
New York city after hearing a suit
brought by Henry L. Sprague, n New
York lawyer.
The suit was based on the alleged
failure on the part of DR. Webb to carry
through In 1902 a deal for the purchase
and sale of the Canada Atlantic com
pany, a small railroad in Canada which
was in the hands of j. r. Booth. well
known in Burlington The road after
wards became part of the Grand
Trunk. In the deal with DR.. Webb and
Sprague was Arthur l.. Meyer, a Wall
Street SPECTATOR, who became famous
In the transaction of the Webb Meyer
eyndicate Meyer attributes his financial
downfall to Dr. Webb and has already
brought a suit against DIR. Webb,
alleging that his losses were due to the
operations of his associate in Rutland
railroad stock.
According to the contract, the three
men were to buy in all of the stock of
the railroad. paying s1o0oo,000 for the
praferred stock and 100000 for the
common The three men placed n deposit
of s250,Oo0 In the hands of Mr.. Booth
TO hold he option and N-eyer, who was
TO have charge of the financing, was to
sell Ill, 200 worth of bonds, issued on
the Canada Atlantic. A further contract
was signed providing that the controlling
stock should he sold to the Rutland
railroad Of which Or. Webb was then
the president No bankers to buy the
bonds could be found, however, unless
they were guaranteed by the Rutland
railroad This was said by DIR. webb
at first to be impossible.
According to the testimony of Sprague
shortly after DR.. Webb had taken hold
Of the deal. he notified him (Sprague)
that he had secured the guarantee and
had found bankers to buy the bonds at
Jos. Early in May he ceased to make
an effort to carry through the deal. on
May ?, Meyer testified that he had been
ruined by the decline in value Of the
Rutland stock from 125 to a. Mr..
Sprague testified that after the down
fall of Meyer, DR. Webb went to him
and offered to put through the scheme
provided that Meyer he left out of the
deal This Sprague refused to do
In defense. DR.. Wehh's attorneys claim
ed that his reluctance to take part in
the deal with Meyer was not because
he did not desire to share the profits
with him but he had lost heavily in the
Rutland stock himself and largely
through the fnanciering of Meyer
Referee Odell, in rendering his decision,
said that there was no clear or salts
factory proof that DIR. Webb had lost
through the speculations OF Meyer in the
stock market When the time on the
option with Nj Booth expired the for
felt of s25O,ON0 went to Mr.. Booth and
the s12500o which Sprague had put into
that sum was lost In his suit Mr..
Snrague claimed that DR.. Webb should
pay him the sum of $685. and 81, 333, 333
which would be the share of himself
and Meyer who has assigned his claim
to Sprague, as their share in the ex-
7ccted profits of 100000 and the further
I'm of $1,000 for legal fees The
force found that Sprague was entitled
~ the 125ooO, which he had invested
with the invested and $40 00O legal fees
With interest from June, 1902, totalling
t29975o,