New-York tribune., 1919-12-11


the New York club against Ban John
son and the five club owners that sup
ported him solidly in every vote taken
during the short but bitter annual
meeting.
The nature of these actions the
revolutionary faction would not dis
close Con advice of counseD; neither
Johnson nor counsel himself and as
ciates would discuss their purport. In
addition to these three legal processes
Joseph Heintzman, lawyer of Cincin-
natl, sued Mr.. Johnson and the Ameri-
can League for sum in excess of
$700 as payment for alleged profess
slonal services in investigating condi-
tions relative to contract for the
privilege of dispensing news service
on the part of the Western Union.
Both Sides Bitter
So far as legislation is concerned
the annual meeting was merely flash
in the pan. 1t is alleged that both sides
INDUCED in scathing vituperation and
invective. But the stenographic re-
ports have not been made public as
yet. The big point at issue developed
in the election of officers. Johnson's
ecutive was fulfilling twenty-year
term at salary of 100000 year and
consequently there was no occasion to
elect president, secretary or treasurer
three Offices johnson has been filling.
The revolutionary faction was voted
down on the proposition by five to
three. Likewise by vote of to
three the 1919 board Of directors
Ccmiskey, Rupert, Fra4ee and Dunn
6yv
ny new staff: Benja Miner (Wash-
ington), Benjamin Shibe (Philadel-
phla), Phil Ball est. Lous) and Frank
!. Navin (Detroit).
This, with the decision to play a
schedule of 154 games in 1920, consti-
tuted the sum total of action at the
annual meeting. The old or retiring
board OF directors furnished the main
fireworks. Also it furnished "a tech
nical point on which Johnson's sup
porters will attempt to break all the
legislation or alleged legislation ef
fected by the revolutionary wing.
AS nearly as could be learned from
the legal representatives of the war
ring factions, the whole case hinges
on a point Of veracity. The johnson
side claims it's leader was thrown out
Of the meeting of the board of direc-
tors. The revolutionary three stoutly
maintain that Johnson and James C.
Dunn bolted the meeting. George
his colleagues, will seek to have this
annual meeting of the directors de-
clared unconstitutional by the courts
as result of the alleged faux pas.
Here are the two sides of the Incl
dent as related by the respective
spokesmen. Colonel Rupert, for the
board of directors, maintains that when
the meeting was called to order Mr..
johnson, unlimited, took the chair.
question Of the Craftsmanship be put
to vote. Mr.. Miller Counsel for MIR.
Johnson) interpolstcd that the league
constitution made johnson chairman
eX-otficio.
Rupert Seeks Counsel
Colonel Rupert declared that if
Mr.. johnson were represented by coun-
sci he should be given the same privi-
lege. He left the room to bring in one
OF his attorneys, who was waiting in
the next room. When he returned,
Mr.. Johnson and James C. Dunn had
both left the meeting. Messrs. Rup-
pert, Comiskey and Frazee all declare
that when the point was raised,
to await the result of Mr.. Rupert IS
visit to his counsel, but they declined
and left without explanations.
These three directors insist further
that when Mr. Auerbach of counsel for
the rebellous three advised that Mr.
johnson act as chairman the three
directors Immediately got in touch
with Mr.. Miller and advised him to
have Messrs. Johnson and Dunn return
to the meeting, MIR. Johnson to act
as chairman. Messrs. Johnson and
1oJ rnt,lI ~
be found. There ensued delay OF
an hour and half, at the end of which
time the three directors decided to GO
on with the annual meeting with the
quorum on hand
Here is Mr.. Miller's story. on the
other hand. He says that the annual
meeting of the board OF directors was
no sooner called together than Colonei
Rupert nominated c. A. Comiskey fol-
chairman, and that Mr.. Comiskey was
elected by a vote of three to one. That
this election was made over the protest
of Mr.. Miller shat the league consti-
trtion names the president (Mr. John.
SOM chairman ex officio. That his
client left the meeting under the i'm
preston of direct repulse and that
therefore whatever action the board OF
directors may have taken subsequently
was unconstitutional. Mr.. Miller in.
SlnuateS, III SuoIC, tHdt Dy ~
recognize the duly qualified chairman
the Big Three pulled boner" and
forfeited whatever chance they might
have had for trouble making.
That the board of directors, which
had been forced to act without the
presence OF either Johnson or Dunr
since the Mays litigation started, coulc
be pacihed with nothing short of John
sons scalp. is quite evident from the
various resolutions adopted. The last
two of these went to the length OF
declaring the offices Of president, secre
tary and treasurer forfeited by Mr.
Johnson.
Here is one of the big points al
issue that will be fought out in tht
courts of New York State. johnson
and the five club owners supporting
him were forced, of course, to accep,
service for cases that will be triee
here. Each side had emp Dyed court
stenographers to take notes-of the pro
ceedings, so that the truth should bt
arrived at in due time. Comiskey, Rup
pert and Frazee will maintain tha
Messrs. Johnson and Dunn willfully ant
arbitrarily left the meeting withou
breaking up the quorum.
Plan More Court Action
In the mean time, according to the