The diamond drill. (Crystal Falls, Iron County, Mich.) 1887-1996, 1914-02-07


Kinney * Go. 10 long az the partner
ship continued.
The hrm from the beginning had
acted as sales agents for certain out
side mining companies, as well a. for
the product or the mining and fur
nace- companies acquired by the tirm
from time 20 time. and as snch sales
agents at all times received com
mission Of 10 cents ton on all ore
sold by il and of rs cents a ton on all
pig iron sold by IL.
With the exception Of the Quinnesec
mine, which has not been operated
tor number Of years. none of the
mines acquired by Gorrigan, McKin-
ney 4 Co. and these corporations was
held in fee. but only under lease.
The commission OF % cents ton
on pig iron. Aays the court. 'ls less
thant the commission on pig iron
usually charged, the customary com
mission on pig iron being 21s per cent,
and the 10 cents ton for ircn ore is
abont the customary charge for. the
services rendered by firms similarly
situated TO Corrigan, Mckinney & Go.
as sales agents of this ore and pig iron
as n tirm ia required 10 advance money
10 hnance the mining ano marketing
of iron ore including advancing the
payment OF ROYALTIES railroad freight
from the mines to upper lake ports.
the vessel freight to lower lake ports,
marine insurance. dockage and stor-
age charges. The Gales agents also
have charge OF the bringing down
and marketing of the ore. They
must arrange with the railroads foi
transportation of the ore to the mp.
per lake ports, must charter boats,
establish schedules arrange with the
various dock companies at the lower
lake ports for the unloading of vessels
all OF the details incident TO the shin
ping and sale of the ore 20 the pur
chaser -
II appears from the testimony thai
Edmund 5. Burke Jr. and Parthenis
Burke Ross voluntarily withdrew from
, the partnership because they did no
care to assume the responsibility
arising from the construction of In,
steel plant by the River Furnace Co
Mrs. Ross desired that the contrac
between the Quinnesec Iron Minin,
20. and Corrigan, Mckinney d Go.
relating to the payment OF commits
sions be declared null and void an,
that the trm of Corrigan. McKinne,
q Co and its several partners be com
PEELED to account for the profits which
s. they had received Her obvious in
terest was that, having withdraw
from the firm OF Corrigan, McRinne,
n q Co. she no longer shared part 0
If these commissions, though her interes
70 in the Quinnesec Iron Mining Go
J. remained unimpaired as q stakeholder
o The court concludes 1T is onl,
/ Reasonable to suppose that when tn
y various parties entered into the con
tract of 1905, they had reference to to-
J. irm of Corrigan. Mckinney s. Co.
; rs 10 was we'll known to all that the,
It did nor regard the membership iron
It time to time. and they intended tina
h this firm OF Corrigan, Mckinney 4
It Co. so long as IL existed az such
u hrm, should remain the agent and d
J the business substantially as-the con
3 tract provided
10 The testimony does not indicat
that any unfair advanige was eve
! souvht IN be achieved by any OF III
). members OF this partnership nor 10
Ie the directors or the Quinnesec Iro
), Mining Go. To ba member of th
y partnership was decided advantage
| This right and this privilege was ca
r tended TO the plaintiff and Edmund s
IN Burke Jr. They voluntarily saw
II 70 withdraw from the partnership
F. and ] cannot see from the eyidenc
le which has been presented that n
he contract with Corrigan. Mckinney
IN Co. was in any way unfair. II In
r plaintiff and Edmund s. Burke j
ct have Lost some advantages by reason
A. their withdraw all from the partn,
ss ship. they can make no further clair
" on that basis than that they volu,
nj taiily surrendered what before On,
Id time bad been their right
DO Under the peculiar facts Of A