Evening journal., 1916-05-23
court DECLINES
TO Hold UP next
DUPONT Dividend
Continued From Page -

ter which might be discussed later' /
This subject was argued for few MIN |
utes when the court ended the discus
sion abruptly by saying that he coulu
see no possible excuse for granting an
Injunction annoying nearly 4'OVo
and ieopardizing their IN
terests on such nimsy plea as that
made by the holder Of four shares VINO
had agreed in writing to the plant 'o
which she was attacking.
An interesting feature OF the near
ing came when Judge Latey ana MT
Button we're introduced to the court
Mr.. Rogers objected strongly to grant
ing the courtesy Of the New Jersey
court TO the dupont Company's gen
eral counsel.
lie told the vice Chancellor that
when he had visited Judge batey
Office in Wilmington, Judge Latey had
used fbusive language to him; haa
ordered him from the Office ana hau
threatened to have him put ont OF the
building if he did not go at once. Ihe
court listened to this objection. waved
in aside and granted Judge Latey the
privileges OF the court.
Affidavit Is Filed.
Later an AFFIDAVIT. made by Judge
Taffev. was filed, which throws an
interesting light on this personal un-
ploasantness and on the history Oh
this suit. This affidavit follows
".Iohn p. Laffcy. being duly sworn
deposcs and saws, that he is one OF the
defendants in the above-mentioned case
that he is a director of both deienaahI
corporations and general counsel oil
both: that some days prior TO the sec,
ond dav of May, 1916, he was informed
hv one of the vice-presidents OF t. l.
dupont de Nemours a Company that a
certain attorney in New Jersey mad
taken the trouble TO 90 through all the
documents relating to the organization
of r. l. dupont de Nemours & Company
and the issue and exchange Of IFS secnri-
tics and the transfer OF properties from
T. I duPont de Nemours Powder Tom
many to h. !. dupont de Nemours X
! COMPANY: that he was maintaining the'
! aid transactions were illegal and would
discuss the proposition with me. J. m
formed Mr. Connahle, the vice president
referred TO. that / expected shortly 10 DC
in New York and was perfectly WILING
/ 10 discuss the matter. Nhereupohi on
the 2gth day of April. 1916, a telegram
was received bv Mr. Connable from Mr.
James H. Rogers. the attorney Tor th'
complainant, making an appointment u
New York city at the knickerbockei
Hotel for Nav ,. 1916. ] was going u
| New York ON other matters and Mr.
/ Connable and ! net Mr.. Rogers at IN
said hotel al about 10 o'clock in th'
morning. After Mr. Rogers was intro
duced To me and after some ntorma
conversation. Mr.. Connable brought M
the question of Mr.. Rogers having IN
vestigated .ho financial reorganization
of tho powder company business. MI
Rogers thereupon stated that SOM
stoel.holder. whose name be mcntione
and who was not the complainant D
this case. had called his attention I
the matter and exhibited some OF IN
circulars sent ont by the companyi ina
ne first gave an off hand opinion an
later on he looked it mp very CAREFUL
and made a brief on the subject; tina
he reached the conclusion that the trans
fer of the property and business OF tn
powder company 20 the new compan.
was illegal under the laws Of the stat
, of New Jersey; he further stated;
suppose Won want 10 know the reason
upon which ! base my conclusion an
then proceeded to explain why, in IN
opinion. the transaction was Illegal j
the course Of his discussion he state
ne was not retained by anyone; that u
. looked into the question as matter q
/, interest: that he also stated in this con
. ncction that he had talked with other
about the matter and that he might b
retained TO bring some action. He ais
= stated that as he might he retained
was not proper for me to disclose To Inn
any confidential information. l there
upon stated that there was nothin
confidential about the transaction; tina
the whole matter was n matter of rec
ord and had been given the widest pu'
licity before the reorganization wa
made. and was assented to or acquiesce
in by all Of the stockholders. There
upon the interview came to an end.
This deponent further says tina
he next saw the said James II. Roe
ers at said deponent's Office in vii
mington. Delaware. on the 18th da
, Of May last. and that the said Roger
requested this deponent to acknowl
, edge service of said process in thi
suit, which this deponent refused {
do"
The DUPONT Company directors ar
| 10, ,,,,nf 'frr,.prr,~rr 20 InrIarn fh. nnn