Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-04-08
STOCK OWNERSHIP
ACCOUNTING ASKED
Broker Files Suit to Collect
Fee on Sale of Gas Com
pany Shares.

Declaring that while ostensibly the
controlling interest in the Washington
Gas Light Co. Is owned by the Seaboard
Investment Trust 1t was insreality pur-
chased for Albert e. Pierce, president Of
the Central Public Service Corpoi alton
of Chicago, or for that corporation and
that such purchase made TO evade the
District law is being used as A hasis
for the denial of his claim to q COM
mission of about $500 for lnaugu-
rating and aiding In the purchase,
George Bowie Chapman, local stock
broker, today filed suit in the District
Supreme Court for a discovery and
accounting against Pierce, his company,
Harris, Forbes g. Co. of New York, and
Frederick S. Burroughs, also of New
York
Chapman says the purchase and
acquisition of this stock came about as
a result of his efforts in having in
vestigated the situation, in having
brought defendant, Pierce, into contact
with Ord Preston, who has Just tend
cred his resignation as president of the
Washington Gas Light Co., and in hav-
ing made or obtained the disclosures of
stock ownership. In compensation, he
declares, 1t was agreed that he should
be paid 81 per share on all stock pur-
chased. While not informed as to Just
how many shares were procured, Chip
man asks that the defendants disclose
me total number OF shares so obtained.
Admitted Share Purchase.
The Seaboard Investment Trust, in its
answer to the suit of the Public Utilities
Commission questioning its right to hold
the stock, admitted that 1t had bought
100000 shares. Mr.. Chapman explains
that it was agreed between him and
Pierce that 10000 shares standing in the
name of Dana A. Pearson should not be
included, as Harris, Forbes & Co.
could control that stock. Deducting
these shares would leave $4,000 due
him, Chapman declares through At
torneys Andrew B. Duvall and Frost &,
Towers
Chapman tells the court that in the
Autumn of 1923 he learned that Pierce
and his associates desired to secure con-
troll of the stock of the gas company
and November S, 1928, he got into COM
munication with Pierce, who came to
Washington two days later in company
with George Shriver of Hambleton &
Co. and met him and his aide, Paul D
Keller, at the Carlton Hotel. After a
preliminary conference. he says, they
went to the home of Ord Preston, who
held 5000 shares of stock. Preston
agreed to sell his holdings to Pierce. or
to the company of which he is preSi-
dent, for s125 per share provided that
the same figure should be offered to all
nfhor hn1dnrc pinrne kI@o =
he would pay $l25 for all gas stock that
should be offered
Pierce went to New York, the court
is advised, and arranged with the other
defendants. Harris, Forbes g. Co., and
Frederick H. Burroughs, a director OF
that firm, to finance the stock purchase
for Pierce and /or the Central Public
Service Corporation. Later Pierce was
advised of the ban of the anti-mergeI
statute and with the co-defendants
formed the Seaboard Investment Trust
to circumvent the law.
Agreement Alleged.
Chapman charges there exists an
agreement between Pierce and for the
Central Public Service Corporation, upon
certain conditions unknown to him by
which all the stock of the gas company
is to be transferred upon demand to
Pierce and/or his company or to some
one nominated by them. Since the or
ganization of the Seaboard Investment
Trust Burroughs has been made direc-
tor of the local gas company, the court
is told, and Pierce has visited Washing
ton on divers occasions to confer with
Ord Preston over the management and
affairs of the gas company and in Feb
ruary. 1880, an engineer of the Central
Public Service Corporation examined
the records and files with a view OF
changing the method of conducting
business and changing its rates and
schedules.
It is claimed that Pierce and his
corporation are in full and complete
control of the business, although the
stock for the time being is held In the
name of the Seaboard Investment
Trust. Yet, it is asserted, Pierce has
denied the right of Chapman to any
compensation under the agreement on
the ground that neither he nor his
company bought any stock of the gas
Company and that 1t would have been
illegal for them to have done so
though the fact is, as herein alleged
that beneficially they do own and con-
troll such stock"
The court is asked to decree a dis
covery and to hold that the beneficial
ownership of the Washington Gas Light
Co. stock is in Pierce and (or) the
Central Public Service Corporation and
to give Chapman Judgment for 81
for each and every share Of the stock
shown to have been purchased in excess
Of the an nm shares held nv pearce