New Britain herald., 1916-03-20
GEORGE M. LANDERS
 SUED FOR MILLION
RaglaDd Momand Of Pressure
 Lighting Company Is Plaintifl CLAIMS $1,0t8,288 DAMAGES

CLAIMS $1,O18,288 DAMAGES Ex- Mayor Makes Reply to Civil Ac-
 ton, Giving History of His Dealings
 With Momand and Saying the Suit is Absurd.
 EX-Mayor George M. flanders Of this
 city, who last week lest a S10,000 libel suit against Raglond Momand, 1 vice president and general manager ! of the Pressure Lighting Company of New ' OrI, has in turn been made ! defendant in d suit for $1 ,01S,2SS by Nomand alleging damage done to his business interests It will be remem- bered that Mir. LanderS in his suit claimed that he had becE libcled by Momand, who made chargCs that the New Britain man had played into the hands of the United Gas Improvement company and had sought to wreck the Pressure Lighting company of which he was and is vice president, by fur rishing inside tips to the U. C.. ]. people on bids on municipal lighting contracts with the result th1t the Pressure Lighting company was un- Gerbid and lost the business.
 Mr. Landers' suit for libel was based Cn these charges and he brought nine counts against Momand. The jury brought in an adverse verdict, which counsel for MT. Landers asked to have set aside on the ground that it was contrary to evidence and the jury was influenced by statements which should never have been admitted. MOmand's Suit>
 Tn Nomand's suit for S1,O12.2S9, Arthur L. Livermore, secretary of the Pressure Lighting company is made co-detendant. MOmand aCcuscs the defendants of having coDspred with the United company, when the Pres sure company was successfully com- petlng with il. and after it had sue ceeded in greatly reducing the cost of gas to the people of several cities for their public lighting.
 MT. Nomand in his complaint SaNs that for ten years the Irnito1 com pany has been an unlawful! monopolr and that it has charged c,a eXorbitant price for the service rendered the 1,lll- inequalities. By ownership of stock and interlOclling direct rratrs it con- trollcd nine different companies. IT., 1914. it is alleged the l>rr,,4urr rDn1- panN was the United co:nnnnN',s only r1Nal, all of the other rumrInicS pro tending to be independent being snh- ordinate to the United company, Mr.
 Momand's complaint continues: "During 1912, 1913, ard 1914 the United Gas Improvement Company, through it's officers, agents and attor- neNs cOrruptiy and secretly ar preached the individual defendants a i and unlawfully alienated them from 1 the plaintiff and won them over to 1 the side of the Pressure Lighting Con- 1 pany's competitors.'
 MT. Momand also said that the de- 1 fendants usurped his luties as Gen. 1 eral Manager of the Pressure coul- | pany and thWarted him when he was
 seeking bids for public contracts, pre-
 vented him from properly supervising 1 his work, diverted draft for 3.2S5, 1 intercepted and requested his letters, | concealed orders for supplies from 1 companies. and hid important papers, 1 in order ito effect the total destruc-
 ton of the good will, credit and bus 1 mess of the Pressure LiSht;n:, Com 1 pany.''
 Make General Dcnial, l A general denial has been filed by l the defendants. They ask for a bill
 of particulars. They are anxious to
 know the names of the cities in
 which the Pressure Lighting Company | had contracts, just how the trust oper-
 ated to damage the concern and the
 names of the trust officials who are
 alleged to have approached them and
 alenated them from Mon12nd
 In reply to this demand Momand
 calls the attention of the court 10 the
 fnct that he has applied for m order
 compelling Landers and Livermorc to
 submit to examination before trial,
 and that they have appealed to the
 Appellate Division. This appeal is pending and he feels that he should
 not be made to furnish the bill of
 particulars until the Appnllate Divi-
 sion has decided whether he :nay cx-
 anime the defendants.
 Same old Suit
 Herald Representative asked HIr. l-1nders about tho Momand conspiracy
 suit this morning. Mr Lande.'5 sn;H H:
 This iS the same old sGit bruu31t l ny MT. M"marG late in the y.al Jnl{ | against Pressure Lightins: company, 1 Alr. lhVermorc, and mysclC It nas not , yet been brought to tri.l
 ''ln January, 1912, I bought ar i,,
 tcrcst in the Pressure Lighting cu,1- panN, which owned the Mono.u!u ,>:.- 1 tent device for lighting ana cxtu4- l Guishlng gas lanps and Cn" varying 1 the pressure of gas lamps T,,c l,,rn-
 CT had made d good showing in Bti
 ton on test of fifty hand made
 lamps, but MT. Momand failed 10 get
 his contract for street lighting ir E s- 1 ton.
 ] The burner needed to be perfected i and standardized so shat it could be