The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, June 1, 1916, Page 6

1 Who Was It Fought the Equltyp } Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce, the Real Power, Alded by Llnde, ‘LerS and Other State Poht1c1ans HE Equity Cooperative Exchange proved conclusively that the suit brought in 1914 to compel it to show its books was not brought in good faith by stockholders ho wanted to look into the affairs of e exchange for honest xeasons. "The exchange proved the stockholders bringing the suit were dummies and that the real plamtlfi' was the Chamber of (Commerce 'of Minneapolis. On this showing it argued that it had a right to refuse to open its books, as otherwise it {v:uld be putting information’ in the nds of a business rival, the Chamber of Commerce, to be used against the Equity in an attempt to crush it. Well-settled law was quoted showing that courts had held that a stockholder twanting to examine a concern’s ‘books must come into court with clean hands and in good faith to get the privilege of e¢xamination. If he wanted to examine the books to commit a crime, or to help him in a wrongful or illegal act, or for licious purposes of any kind he could ot do so under the legal decisions quoted by the Equity attorneys. But the lower court held that the statute provided that stockholders could have access to the bocks of a corporation at y time it was wanted, and it ordered the Equity to open its books. STOCKHOLDERS CAN SEE BOOKS EVEN TO AID A RIVAL The Equity lawyers had difficulty in getting a stay of proceedings until the supreme court could pass on the matter, butfimdlydxdw. Thesuptenecourt, however, in an opinion written by Judge auldmg affirmed the-lower court. The court held it was bound by the statute which provided a stockholder could have access to the books of a com- pany when he requested it. Judge Spaulding said it made no-differ- ence whether the stockholder wanted the information to aid a rival of the Equity exchange or as a basis for future litiga- tzon against the exchange. The first fim of the supreme court was re- itten. afterwards when the Equity gsked a rehearing. Its effect was left the same but the wording was modified. The opinicn was rewritten after Judge Spaulding had left the bench, his term having expired and he having failed to be: reelected. Judges Goss, Fisk Bruce concurred in Spaulding’s opin- jon. All of these judges except Bruce Aarean(hdatesagamthlsyearatthe June primaries, opposed to the League candidates, Robinson, Birdzell and Grace. —=So the Equity was compelled to open its books for the benefit of the Chamber of Commerce. The result was as ex- pected. The Chamber brought a new suit, alleged to be based on the informa- tlon it obtained from the Eqmty books, in which it asked that a receiver be appointed for the farmers’ organization, that its affairs be wound up and that its officers be ousted. ATTORNEY GENERAL AIDS | - CHAMBER OF COMMERCE The Chamber secured the aid of the attorney general of the state of North Pakota in this new suit, which was brought in April, 1915. The suit was prought in the name of the state of North Dakota “on the relation of Henry J Linde, attorney general,” who charged in effect that the Equity exchange was financially irresponsible, that it “was bankrupt, that the officers were crooks, that the farmers were being cheated by the. organization and that the books were fraudulently manipulated to deceive the farmers and the stockholders. To thus obtain the aid of Attorney ral Linde in the fight to crush the ’ organization was a master stroke by the Chamber of Commerce. The machinery of the state itself, its legal counsel and resources were to be uged to put this farmers’ organization ‘out of business. 'This, of course, made the cha.rges " against the Equity more plausible. Here was the state itself, represented by the the organization—Editor.) 0 00000000000000 attorney general, pretending to be con- vinced that the Equity exchange was a fraud and asking that its affairs be wound up, “to protect the farmers.” It can be seen that this, from the Chamber of Commerce point of view, was much better than for the Chamber itself to bring the action. The suit in this way was to be brought at the taxpayers’ expense; the people themselves, repres- ented by their state government, were to put the Equity out of busmess, if possible. LINDE'S COMPLAINT SHOWED WHOM HE WAS WORKING FOR If there had been any doubt about who! was trying to cripple or destroy this great farmers’ cooperative organization it now disappeared entirely. The com- plaint in the case brought by Attorney General Linde, alone proved the real plaintiff to be the Chamber of Com- merce. The complaint was supported by a large number of affidavits signed by members of the Chamber of Commerce. The first and principal affidavit on which the suit was brought against the Equity by Attorney .General Linde was made by E. S. Hughes, assistant secre- tary of the Chamber of Commerce. Then Editor Nonpartisan Leader. 0000000000000000000000 0\ _was fit for the office. W pvhere to find it. DIAGNOSING HIS AILMENT Hanna Back of Attack on League, Says Reporter (Editorial in Dickey Reporter) In its issue of May 12th the News comes out with a tirade against John Burke, in which it assails him as the Democratic Donkey of North Dakota. Now the only thing the News can have agamst John Burke is the fact that he is » candidate for U. S. senator and may be in Hanna’s way next fall. The letter of Burke to which it refers simply states that in the opinion of Mr. Burke the farmers did not violate the letter or spmt of the primary election law in’ giving their indorsement to certain can- didates for state office at the commg primary election. The Conrier-News. or no'one else can eonsclent!ously say that the farmers have in any way‘wiolated any law of the state by holdmg their meehng at Fm-go and g-mng their mdmemeuli to_ e ooooooooooooooooco.oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo-oooooooo HELP THE WAGON UP THE HILL Some people of the state have been misled by the dailies which are unfriendly to the League in printing inaccurate statements of what happened at the first great mass meeting at. Fargo. I for one was a delegate chosen by the people of our precinct as a delegate to Grafton and then chosen as one of that body to attend the state convention to be held at Fargo will say I don’t see how Townley had very much to say about it. We as delegates went there determined to do.the right thing for the people of the state as far as lay in our power and as the candidates for office were placed on the black board before our eyes. the responsible position I was placed in to vote for the right man (for it surely was not as some say that the leaders did it all) as several names for each office were before us each time. against each candidate and then we voted by ballot for the man we thought If anyone can see anything crooked about that I don’t I~think we have the cleanest bunch of men running for office that has ever been known in the history of this state. The first I heard when I arrived home was that we had five or six hundred members there. that I am certain there were between 25 hundred and three thousand present. * So my advice to all that may see these few words—if you are a member boost with all your might and if you are not join us and come 'along; be man enough to help push- the wagon up the hill; don’t wait until all is going fine and slip in the hind end, but come on do your duty for the taxpayers of state. Let’s retain the wealth of our state within our state and not send it all to some one else—WM. MORWOOD. ° ° (This is the second article to appear in the Leader regarding the suits § brought during the last two years to put the Equity Cooperative Exchange 2 out of business. The first delt with the dummies employed by the Chamber o of Commerce to bring an action~to compel dn examination of the Equity : books and with the use made of the gang papers by the Chamber in floodmg ° the state with matter calculated to destroy the confidence of the farmers in H ° came an affidavit of J. H. Riheidaffer, grain broker of Minneapolis and member of the Chamber of Commerce. Then came one by E. F. Barrett, traveling representative of the Winter-Truesdell- Ames company, commission merchants and members of the Chamber of Com- merce; Other members of the Chamber of Commerce who made affidavits against the Equity exchange, which affidavits were made a part of the attorney gen- eral’s complaint against the farmers’ organization, were Daniel Engstrom, J. J. Kennedy, Nils Olson and P. M. Ingold. There were others but this is enough. The complaint aAgainst the Equity was supported by affidavits of members of the Chamber of Commerce. Without their affidavits the suit cquld not have' been brought by the attorney general. While the attorney general appeared in the suit to represent the state of North Dakota, Judge Edward Engerud, who brought the first suit against the Equity in 1914 to open the books, was really the chief counsel. His connection with the Chamber of Commerce in the former suit was shown by the former . article . in the Leader. It remains to show his connection with the Chamber as chief counsel for the state of North I for one realized We heard all each one knew for and Will say 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 the men whom they wanted to serve them in state offices. It now appears to us that Hanna is the ; motive behind the fight the. News is making on the League, on John Burke and on the Wilson administration. The League, early in its organization, took a stand against Hanna. Hanna was looked on as the father of the Roosevelt campaign in this state four years ago and John Burke is likely to be his oppon- ent this fall for U. S. senator. tting these facts together we think we have located the News and can see the stand- point from wich it is’ making ' its political fight. We would advme the farmers to sit tight and not be shaken by any attack on their organization by the Courier- News, for it appears the News is not - animated in this matter from motives looking to the welfare of the farmers or other interests of the state. It seems tohaveltskmfereadyformmanor orgamnhon of men opposed to its pet Dakota in the action by Attorney General Linde.. Judge Engerud was finally forced by the Equity to take the mtness : stand. LINDE WAS ASSISTAN‘[‘ TO CHAMBER'S ATTORNEY Attorney Engerud testified. to some remarkable things. He said that Tread- well Twitchell, member of the last legis- lature and opponent 'of the terminal elevator bill, had contributed $100 to the fund to fight the Equity. He said $600 had been donated by Editor J. H. Adams 'of the Cooperative Farmer and Manager, one of the organs of the Chamber of Commerce that had been engaged in a fight on the Equity. This was the same Adams who had guaranteed Mr. Enge- rud’s fees in his first suit ag'ainst the Equity. But his testimony involved another famous - character who had agreed to donate something to the cause of putting the farmers’ exchange out of business. .. He testified that R. S. Lewis of the state board of control, appointee of Gov- ernor Hanna and author of the report that- killed the terminal elevator propo- sition in the last legislature, had promy ised to help the fund along. Mr. Lewis promised to raise some money to fight the Equity, Engerud said. Some of it he would give himself and the rest he would get from ‘his friends.” But Attorney Engerud’s chief con- fession was that he had spent many days conferring with officers and members of the Chamber of Commerce before he pre- pared the complaint against the Equity and laid the matter before the attorney general. affidavits were drawn up in the offices of the Chamber and that he had had the able assistance of the officers and mem- bers of the Chamber in preparing his case. Mr. Engerud could not very well deny these things, for the Equity lawyers had the facts in regard to where he had been and to whom he had talked during the preparation of the suit. In questioning him they gave dates and places and he was forced to admit where he had been and where he got the information and affidavits on which to base the suit. EQUITY WINS BATTLE; CASE STILL IN COURT The suit brought by the attorney gen- eral was tried out on the single propo- sition of whether or not a receiver was to be appointed for the Equity. The court held that there was no ground for the appointment of a receiver. Attorney General Linde and Attorney Engerud did not appeal this decision and that phase of the case is settled. The other issues, however, are still to be tried. These are the request of the attorney general that the Equity’s affairs be wound up and the corporation dissolved, or that the officers of the Equity be ousted. These two questions are yet to be tried. v A yearhaspassedmncetheconrt' decided that he would not appoint a receiver, and during that tune no effort as reported by the Leader last week, attorneys for the Equity haye forced the hand of the opposition by noting the case have to be dismissed or tried. . There!emamstobetoldthereuonfor the oppomhon to the Equity by the reason why ? flmusandsofdolhmwémmtnndthe‘ S5 .influenced attorney general of the state hbnngthemtopntfl:eommmi % outofbusmeu. Thzle&derwfllhmdh He admitted that most of the . = I g T e