Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1921-11-09

SlUOU with interest is COntdiIeu III
the report of the referee. Associate
Justice Warren c. Philbrook of Wa
terville, in the case of the kennebec
Housing company of Waterville vs..
Charles II. Barton Of Watervllie,
hearing upon which was held Sept
at Waterville. By the referees re-
ports finding is also made for the
plaintiff, the Kennebec Housing COM
pany, III four other cases of the same
import and based on the same cause
of action-one case against Henry }.
Collins, two cases against Ernest l..
Cove, and one case against Edward
G.. Grondin, all of Watervile.
The report of the referee, Justice
Philbrook, in the case of the Kennc-
bee Housing company VS.. Charles II.
Barton o. Waterville has recently
been filed at the Office of the clerk of
courts for Kennebec county and is
as follows:
This case and four others of the
same import based upon the same
cause of action were referred to me
10 be heard Jointly. The parties and
:
sci. appeared before me at Water
VILE on Wednesday, Sept. 18th, where
testimony was taken for four days.
The evidence was extremely vol
luminous and after the hearing was
completed an opportunity was af-
torded counsel to present a written
argument upon the law and the evil
dence which each claimed were in
volved in the cases.
The plaintiff is corporation or
ganiZed under the laws of the State
of Maine in November 1919. the pur-
poses being ito acquire and hold
real estate and manage, improve,
lease and sell the same, having in
view especially the increase and im-
provement of housing facilities in
Waterville, Winslow. Nassalboro,
Benton, Fairfield and Oakland, Me-
It appears from the evidence that
the organization of the corporation
arose from community spirit to in
crease housing facilities in the towns
above mentioned and especially in
the city of Waterville. Apparently it
was anticipated that interested citi-
zens would voluntarily subscribe for
stock in the company to an amount
sufficient for the success of the en-
terprises, but such voluntary sub
ScriptionS not appearing, certain
officers of the corporation began u
campaign to secure purchasers of
capital stock of the company. Those
officers approached the defendant
and as a result of the interview the
defendant signed pledge card of the
following tenor:
"Kennebec Housing Company.
Pledge card. I agree to purchase ten
shares of stock of the Kennebec
Housing Company.
Par value 500. Total 81 900,
% per cent. to be paid 10 days from
date and the balance as voted by the
board of directors when decided.
Date. 49,. ..... Jan. Is, 1920.
Sign here. C. H. Barton"
1t is to be noted that the defend
ant agreed to make % per cent. of
the payment within 10 days from
date and the balance in accordance
with u vote by the board of directors
when needed. At meeting of the
board of directors held February 81,
1920. it was voted that the treasurer
call upon every stock holder to pay
the full amount of his subscription
at once" 1t was admitted that de-
mand was made upon the defendant
for the payment of the amount due
according to the pledge card and
upon refusal to so pay, this suit was
instituted. The writ was dated Au-
gust 9. 1920, returnablc at the SUI
perior court of Kennebec county and
1t remained on the docket until the
January term 1921 when it was re-
fcr"ed to me. No plcadings were flied
Intil September term 1921 which
opened on Tuesday, Sept 9th, that
being the date next preceding the
, date of hearing. In addition to, the
plea of general issue, the defendant
fled brief statement of special
matter OF defense as follows:
/ THAT said defendant never sub
scribcd for nor promised to pay for
any shares in the plaintiffs company:
that the signature of said defendant
was procured and affixed to said
subscription card by fraud and mis-
representation on the part of the
Plaintiff company, its agents and ser
wants, and the defendant as soon as
he learned of the same notified the
plaintiff company through it's officers
and agents that he withdrew his sub
scription; that the defendant sub
scribed to said shares Of stock on
certain conditions to be performed
by the plaintiff which conditions were
conditions precedent to any liability
on the part of the defendant and
which have not been performed by the
plaintiff; that a radical and funda-
mental change was made by the
plaintiff without the consent of the
defendant in the character of the
original enterprise by which the de-
! PENDANT became released from any
promise: that the enterprise under
/ taken by the plaintiff was total
| failure; that the affairs of the plain
| tiff have been rccklossIy and necii-
! gently managed by it, its directors
| and officers by reason of which all
subscribers will lose all monev in
vested in said enterprise: that the
plaintiff through its directors and
officers has made secret agreements
! to release other subscribers from
their subscriptions, and although a
note was passed to enforce by legal
action every unpaid subscription only
five suits were brought and entered
in court, whereas many oilers have