The Washington herald., 1920-05-02

proved Of this removal because. a.
he stated in his bill of complaint.
he considered such action a mere
subterfuge and an utterly inade-
quate remedy for the evils arising
from the mismanagement and mis-
conduct of said publishing society
trustees, said Dittemore having
long tken and then insisting upon
the position that said evils TIM
peratively required the removal of
all three trustees, especially of the
dominating trustee, Herbert W.
Eustace."
Say He Defied Majority.
Mr.. Dittemore withdrew from the
meeting. The remaining directors
then voted to remove him. alleging
in their resolution he had attempted
to do as an individual what could
only be done by the board: that
he had refused to be bound by the
decision of the majority of the
board; had attempted to force them
to submit to his will; had carried
on a campaign for personal in
fluence and control in the apairs
Of the Mother Church: that he had
produced "discord and trouble" be-
tween the directors and the trus-
tees. had acted in a rude. often
sive and threatening manner to-
ward other members of the board,
and other charges of a somewhat
similar nature.
After passing this resolution the
directors elected Mrs. Annie H.
Knott, of Boston. to succeed Mr..
Dittemore as a director.
March rs the actual litigation
began. The trustees filed a bill
in equity to compel the reinstate-
ment of Mr.. Rowlands as a mem
Der of the board and to restrain
the directors from interfering with
the trustees in the discharge of
their duties as trustees under the
trust instrument of January IS.
1895" AS there was doubt to the
legality of Mr.. Dittemore's removal
both he and Mrs. Knott were
namsd as defendants directors in
the bill.
Many Charges Made.
April 10. Mr.. Dittemore filed an
answer to the trustees bill, charg-
ing disloyalty. misconduct, misman-
agement, and ineficiency on the
part of all three trustees. In II he
asserted the trustees had sought
to withdraw the publishing society
from the control of the directors
and that it was largely because of
his opposition to this that he was
dismissed as a director.
Mr.. Dittemore filed a bill in
equity April 20 against the direc-
tors asking the court to declare
void the vote removing him and also
to restrain the directors from inter-
fering with his rights and func-
tions as director or attempting to
seize any book, or documents in his
possession in that capacity.
After various court proceedings in
relation to temporary injunction
and alleged violations of them, j.
was agreed that the two bills
should be heard before a master.
and former Federal Judge Frederic
Dodge. celebrated jurist and wide
ly known as an expert on the in
terpretations Of deeds, was assigned
to hear them.
In order to save time and avoid
calling the same witnesses twice it
was agreed by the lawyers for all
sides that the two bills in equity
should be heard jointly. counsel for
Mr.. Dittemore have the right to
examine all witnesses called and all
documents, and other exhibits in
troduced.
Washington Man Is Counsel.
The hearing began June 3. The
courtroom was crowded with spec
tators for the peculiar nature of the
controversy and the remarkable at
ray of legal talent had attracted not
only Christian scientists, but out
siders.
Sherman L. Whipple and Lothrop
Wilmington, of Boston, and Silas D.
H. Stawrn, of Chicago. appeared as
counsel for the trustees. Former
United States Supreme Court Jus
tice Charles Evans Hughes was also
a counsel for the trustees, but did
not appear in Boston.
Mr.. Dittmore was represented by
Gen. Frank S. Streeter, of Concord,
n. H. who had been Mrs. Eddys
own lawyer; William G. Thompson,
of Boston, and F. C. Demond. of
Concord, N. H. For the directors
appeared former Gov. John L. Bates,
of Boston, who had played a promi-
nent part in previous Christian Sci
ence litigation; Edwin A. Kr4dthoff,
of Washington, D. c., a Christian
Scientist; Judge Clifford P. Smith,
of Boston, also a Christian Scientist,
and E. E. Dane, of Boston.
The hearings ran several days in
June, all of July, the first week in