New Ulm review., 1920-11-24
INVESTMENT FIRM
WILL TAKE BONDS
KALMAN, MATTESON, AND
WOOD HALT COUNTY'S AP-
PEAL HIGH COURT.
DECIDE TO PURCHASE BROWNS
BRIDGE AND DRAINAGE
SECURITIES.

On January %, 1920, the county
board of Brown county was presented
with proposal of the firm of Kalman,
Matteson & Wood, investment
brokers, of st. Paul and Minneapolis,
for the purchase of S250,000.00 worth
of bridge and drainage bonds OF the
county at certain stipulated rates,
which proposal was accepted by the
county board.
Bought Part of Bonds.
The investment brokers soon there
after took 100000 worth of the bridge
bonds and negotiations were entered
upon for S150,000 of drainage bonds.
During the negotiations the counsel
for the Twin City firm concluded that
it was necessary to advertise all OF the
drainage bonds. The county board
felt that it could dispose OF these
drainage bonds without advertising,
at least as to all bonds issued tor
bitches established and constructed
prior to the Laws Of 1917, or such as
were completed under the provisions
of law prior to the Laws of 1917, as
provided in the ditch law, also claim
ing that since any of the bonds issued
for bitches established and constructed
subsequent to the Laws of 1917 and
included by the agreement OF boIn
parties to this controversy IN the
issuance of these bonds, that the pro-
visions of the Laws of 1917 with re-
spect to drainage bonds did not apply.
The county proceeded toh make dis
posal of these bonds pursuant to the
agreement with Kalman, Matteson q
Wood, but that firm refused to take
the securities under their agreement. ;
Thereupon the county board sold
the bonds, in the amount Of S144, ,Ooo
to Kalman, Matteson & Wood, and
ordered that in the event this firm did
not comply with their agreement, that
the county attorney institute legal
proceedings to compel them to take
the securities. .--. -
Legal Proceedings Instituted.
1t was necessary that action be IN
stituted, which was done on August
80, 1920; and to the complaint OF the
county the defendants interposed
demurrer, alleging that the complaint
of the county did not state cause CT
action. =
This question was argued in Ramsey
county district court before Judge
Hascal r. Brill of St. Paul on October
9, 1920, and the court ruled that the
demurrer should be sustained.
This decision was rendered on
October 16, and at the next meetlng g
of the county board it was resolved
that the County Attorney, W. T.
Eckstein should appeal from Judge
Brilps decision.
Brokers Change Their Mind.
The proper steps were at once taken
for perfecting said appeal and the
printing of the paper book and brief
of the county was being done in the
Review printing office, when, on Satur-
day last the firm of Kalman, Matteson
&, Wood sent word to County Attorney
Eckstein that they would take the
bonds at onces Thereupon the pro-
ceedings were halted and a represen-
tative of the firm arrived on the even
ing train of the same day. An ar
rangement had been made for the
county board to meet him in an even,
ing session Of the board, whereupon al
matters in dispute were settled anc
agreed upon, and the appeal will be
dismissed.
Credit Due Attorney Eckstein.
The Twin City investment brokers
were either "stalling" for time expect
ing the financial stringency to rela,
sufficiently for them to recoup on thu
losses they would have sustained, hat
they been compelled to ltake.the bond
when they were offered by the count!
a few months ago, or they expected
to bluff" County Attorney Ecksteil
and the members of the county boart
into submission. 1t is estimated tina
Kalman, Matteson & Wood woult
have lost approximately 100000, ha,
they been obliged to secure the neces
sary funds to purchase the county
bonds at the then current rate of in
terest. At any rate, considerabl
credit is due our efficient county at
torney, as well as the county board
for their refusal to be bluffed by tn
Twin City capitalists.