Evening journal., 1920-11-15
FISHERIES CASE
DEFENSE OPENS
Continue From FIrst Pagc. J

Continued From First Page.)
Ridgely had rested his side Of The
case, George n. Davis. counsel for
Mr.. Pennington. renewed his motion
2 last week that the bill OF COM
plalnt as 10 Mr.. Pennington and the
chemical company be dismissed The
motion was denied by the Chancellor
and an exception was noted by Mr..
Davis.
In opening for the defendants Mr..
Reinhardt said In answering charges
in the bill they would show that
the shares OF stock the directors
voted To themselves were for services
rendered other than directors. and
that the 20 shares voted was paid for
with notes.
John Il. Baylis was the FIRST witness
called by Mr. Relnhardt today. He
said he had been a director OF the
| LeWes Fisheries Company from its or
ganizatiOn TO It's dissolution lie was
questioned as TO services he and the
other directors had given the company
outside the usual services Of a direc-
tor which entitled them TO the 10
shares Of stock each. The witness
said the directors sold stock OF the
company TO the amount Of $4,000 to
$40 900; that they secured a site from
The Lewes Town Council for the plant
at a rental Of 81 year for ten years
/ when other fisheries companies were
paying 81 200 a year for less ground ;
that the directors prepared the plans
for the plant and saved the company
about $4,000. The witness also told
Of other services rendered by the di-
rectOrs in connection with the cree
tion Of the plant and the boats
Mr.. Baylls said the directors. when
the boats would come in with an eX-
ira large load Of flsh, would hurry
around and get men 10 help in hand
ling the FISH and In this way saved
the company thousands OF dollars by
fresh, thereby getting more oil.
Mr.. Renhardt attempted 10 prove by
the witness that that kind OF services
rendered by the directors OF The
Loves Fisher es Company for tha
financial benefit OF the company was
not rendered by the directors OF other
fisheries concerns for their companies,
lbut Mr.. Ridsley's objections to .this
line OF questioning was sustained by
the court Mr.. Baylls said he received
no salary as director in 1911. From
annual salary Of $1,000 each These
salary payments. he said. were shown
on the books OF The company.
on cross XamlnatiOn. Mr.. Rldgely
lasked The witness If when he became
a director of the company he did moi
know that neither the bylaws nor
charter OF the company authorized
The payment Of salaries 10 the d.
reciors At first he said he knew
thal but later said a resolution
adopted gave the rectors ihat right
lie said he Noed for The resolution
which gave TO The directors 70 shares
Of stock each. Witness also thought
he said, that the bylaws gave the
directors the right 10 charge fol
their services. The resolution givlne
1.-the 10 shares of stock TO the dlrec-
tors was adopted, he said, September
u. 1911.
In answer to questions by Mr.
Ridgely, Mr. Baylis said when the
directors voted the 70 shares of stool
TO each dir ctOr, which was on sep
icmher 2l 1911. Layton and Company
of Philadelphia. had sold about $50,
. 600 of the stock OF the company anl
b the directors had sold from $4,000 Il
$4,000 in addition to stock held b,
the directors MIR Rldgely next askel
I The witness If he knew that the book
( OF the company show only a total o
$4,000 Of stock sold up to Seplembe
2i. 1911 but Withdrew the question
before 10 was answered.
Council got into a squabble over Tn
date Of the issuing of the flfteel
shares of stock. one book indicate,
10 was issued September Is, 1911. an,
another book gave the date as Sep
lember %. 1911. Mr.. Baylis testified
TO voting for the adoption Of resolu
tlons. after receiving the fifteen shares
of stock, for the payment Of money q
himself and the other directors. Thl
witness was on the stand when cour
took a recess.