Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1914-07-18
The Defendants

The Defendants
The defendants who include various
New Haven directors since 1908, and
estates of deceased directors are:
William Rockefeller Charles NJ. Pratt,
Lewis Cass Ledyard, H. Nick. Twom-
bly,, George McC. Miller. George j.
Brush, James S. Hemingway, A. H.
Robertson, Frederick F. Brewster,
Charles F. BROKER, D. Newton Bar
ney, James S. Elton. Henry x. Nc
Harg. Robert w. Taft, William Skin
err. Charles S. Mellen, Alexander
Cochrane, J. P. Morgan estate. Edwin
Miner estate, l. Dew. Warner estate
Armory A. Lawrence estate.
The plaintiffs alos name John L. Bill
lard. George F. Baker, It. Dewitt Guy
Ter. Edward Milligan, F. T. Maxwell,
Theodore N. Vail, S. w. Winslow,
Laurence Minot. Samuel Rea, Morton
F. Plant, Dever H. Warner, John L.
Pratt, Howard Elliott James L. Rich
ards, W. M. Crane, A. T. Hadley and
j. H. Hustis as having been directors
since 1909. but, as to whether their fail
ure to cause the road to institute a
restitution suit, has made them liable
on account of negligence and violation
Of fiduciary, the plaintiffs state that
| they are not advised and make no
| specific averment.
Form of Litigation
The litigation is in the form of an
equity action entered by the attorneys
/ as trustees under the will of Olea
| Bull Vaughan. They own so shares of
New Haven stock and bring the action
lin behalf of themselves and all 9TH
er stockholders of said corporation who
may become parties
The bill of complaint declares that
the defendants, on account of breach
Of directors duty, chiefly through
| causing the New Haven to acquire IL
| legally its Boston & Maine, trolley
and steamship properties, are bound
| to pay to the New Haven S162. 600 900
withdrawn therefrom wrongfully and
for ultra wires and illegal purposes.
1t is alleged that the losses resulting
from these acquisitions approximate
100000 and that under the federal
antitrust act the New Haven is en-
titled to recover from the defendants
three-fold that sum or 1905, 0OO,0 600
Allegations in Suit
are the following:
That about 1904 Directors Rockefel-
Ter, Mellen, BROKER, Barney, Skinner
Miller, Brush, Twombly. Taft, Nor
gan, ST., Miner and 1. DeVer Warner
conceived and entered upon a plan
and scheme to effect a monopoly of all
the transportation companies and sys
TENS in the New England states: that
In execution of this plan they negotiat-
ed for competitive steam and electric
| railways and steamship lines and that.
in line with these acquisitions, these
directors and those associated with
them, took about 5000, 600, 900 from the
New Ravens treasury.
That of this total approximately
100000 has been expended on street
railways, as contrasted with only $780,
| 100000 fair value thereof, representing
s46,OOOOOO loss.
That $24,o00,000 of these expenditures
were on street railways located
chiefly in Massachusetts and Vermont,
of which the fair value is $4,000. 900;
about $30,000,000 on those chiefly in
Rhode Island. against s1O,OOO,o0o fair
value; and about $4S.000.000 on those
chiefly in Connecticut and New York
against $33,000.000 fair value.
That about May 1, 1907, defendants
acquired with cash or it's equivalent
belonging to the New Haven, from and
through Defendants Ledyard and
Pratt, who were at the time directors
of Boston & Maine, about Ito, 900
shares, or practically a controlling in
terest in Boston 4 Maine, which was
operating a steam road competitive in
certain territory with the New Haven,
especially in respect to traffic with
Western states. A total expenditure Of
about s32. 100000 on Boston & Maine
by the New Haven has been caused by
the defendants and, as Its Boston &
Maine shares are worth not over $10,-
100000, it has lost approximately $22,-
000, 900.
That the New Haven had no charter
authority to acquire the properties in
question; that their acquisition was
prohibited by specific statutory enact
ment in Massachusetts at least and
also by the Sherman antitrust act;
and that the New Haven did not ac-
quire legal titles for any purpose ex-
cept to compel return to it of its funds
illegally expended in connection there
with.
That there are claims against de-
PENDANTS for New Ravens political
contributions and payment Of lobby
lists.