Jewell v. Rock River Paper Co.

101 Ill. 57, 1881 Ill. LEXIS 47
CourtIllinois Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 10, 1881
StatusPublished
Cited by28 cases

This text of 101 Ill. 57 (Jewell v. Rock River Paper Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Illinois Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Jewell v. Rock River Paper Co., 101 Ill. 57, 1881 Ill. LEXIS 47 (Ill. 1881).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Mulkey

delivered the opinion of the Court:

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Court for the First District affirming a decree of the Superior Court of Cook county, in favor of appellees, as creditors of the Chicago Publishing Company, and against the company and certain of its stockholders, to recover from the latter unpaid subscriptions to its capital stock.

The company was organized under the general Incorporation act of 1872, entitled “An act concerning corporations, ” in the latter part of the winter of 1878, with 0. A. Willard, since deceased, as its president and business manager. The statement filed with the Secretary of State, as required by the second section of the Incorporation act, shows the company was organized for the purpose of doing a general printing business, including the publication of a newspaper in the city of Chicago, the business place of the company, and that its capital stock was limited to $150,000, being divided into 1500 shares, of $100 each. Its organization, so far as we are able to discover, seems to have been in strict conformity with the statutes. It was evidently the purpose of - the promoters of this company that it should, as it subsequently did, supersede the Post and Mail Printing Company, an existing organization then engaged in the same business, proposed to be conducted on a more extensive scale by the new company, under whose management a daily newspaper, known as the “Chicago Post, ” was then being published, the said 0. A. Willard being the president and general manager of that company also.

At the time of the organization of the new company the Post and Mail Printing Company was indebted to various individuals in the sum of $45,000, which indebtedness was represented by forty-five notes of the company, for the sum of $1000 each, and all secured by a deed of trust executed by the company to Arnold Tripp, as trustee, on the entire assets of the concern, ten of these notes belonging to appellee the Rock River Paper Company. Default having been made in the payment of these notes, the trustee, at the instance of the holders, proceeded to advertise for sale the mortgaged property. Pending this advertisement, to-wit, on the 28th of February, 1878, there was a meeting of the directors of the Chicago Publishing Company, at which a resolution was passed by the board authorizing and directing 0. A. Willard, the president of the company, to bid at the trustee’s sale the sum of $45,000 for the property, franchises, etc., of the Post-Mail Printing Company, to be paid two years after date, with interest at the rate of ten per cent per annum, payable semiannually, and to be secured by a mortgage on the property purchased. This resolution seems to have been adopted in pursuance of an arrangement which had already been made with the holders of the notes of the old company, to the effect that they would accept in payment of the indebtedness of the latter company the notes of the new company, of the character specified in the resolution. The effects and franchises of the old company were accordingly purchased at the trustee’s sale, in pursuance of the above resolution and the understanding with the .creditors of the old concern. The old notes were surrendered, and new ones given to the holders by the new company, which were secured by a deed of trust on the purchased property, as above stated, and from thenceforth the old company abandoned its organization and ceased to do business. On the 17th of March following, Oliver A. Willard, the president and business manager of the Chicago Publishing Company, died, and from thence until the filing of the bill in this case the stockholders of the company seemed to lose all interest in its success, and its affairs gradually grew worse, until it drifted into insolvency, and all its tangible effects, with the exception of some accounts, were sold under the deed of trust above mentioned, when it ceased to do business, and a receiver, under the present bill, was appointed to wind up its affairs. The -record shows that many of the subscribers to the capital stock were at the time of their subscriptions, and still are, insolvent, and that but a small portion of the stock had been paid in before the commencement of the suit.

Answers were filed by appellants and some of the other defendants, alleging, in substance, the whole of the capital stock had not been subscribed; that many of the subscriptions were colorable, merely, and that the parties making them were notoriously insolvent, of all which appellees had notice; that the proposed organization of a new company was but a scheme devised by the managers of the old one to saddle the debts of the old concern upon unsuspecting subscribers who might be induced to take stock in the pretended new company, etc. The other defendants failed to answer, and were regularly defaulted.

The cause was referred to the master, whose report shows the total amount due from all the stockholders, the amount due from the solvent stockholders, the total amount of the company’s indebtedness, and the names of the persons having claims against the company, and the amounts due them, respectively; and also, that after exhausting all the debts due from the solvent stockholders there will be an unpaid balance due from the company of $14,473.66, unprovided for. Although such of the stockholders as interposed a defence to the bill were notified to appear before the master, for the purpose of taking such steps as they might deem proper with respect to the report of that officer before filing it in court, none of them appeared before him for such purpose, or took any exceptions to it, until after it was filed in court, and only one of the defendants, namely, appellant Hugh A. White, filed exceptions to it at all. The report of the master was approved by the court, and a final decree entered in accordance with its findings. From that decree sixteen of the defendants appealed to the Appellate Court, and the cause was there heard, resulting in an affirmance of the decree of the Superior Court. All of the defendants seem to have acquiesced in the judgment of the Appellate Court except James S. Jewell, David R. Dycke, Hugh A.White, and Thos. C. Hoag, the present appellants, who bring the record to this court for review.

Various’ reasons are assigned why the judgment of the Appellate Court should be reversed, none of which are deemed sufficient.

It is first objected that the full amount of capital stock required by the articles of association before it could become a legally organized body, was never subscribed. Assuming this objection, if true, could be made available under the circumstances of this case, of which w¿ deem it unnecessary to express any opinion, we are satisfied, from the proofs before us, the requisite amount of capital stock was subscribed. The articles of association certified by the Secretary of State, afford prima facie evidence of the fact, which has not, in our judgment, been overcome by anything appearing in the record tending to establish a contrary conclusion. This part of the controversy is narrowed down to the subscriptions of White, Miller and Culver. So far as the latter is concerned, we find no evidence at all tending to overcome the prima facie case made by the certified articles of association.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Grundy County National Bank v. Westfall
301 N.E.2d 28 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1973)
Hutcheson v. Herron
266 N.E.2d 449 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1970)
Moulding-Brownell Corp. v. E. C. Delfosse Construction Co.
26 N.E.2d 709 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1940)
American National Bank & Trust Co. v. Morgan
18 N.E.2d 741 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1939)
Dreger v. Boyer
18 N.E.2d 87 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1938)
Walker v. Chicago, Madison & Northern Railroad
199 Ill. App. 610 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1916)
Silvain v. Benson
145 P. 175 (Washington Supreme Court, 1915)
Huster v. Newkirk Creamery & Ice Co.
1914 OK 295 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1914)
First National Bank of Crown Point v. Davis
146 Ill. App. 462 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1909)
Jones & Dommersnas Co. v. Crary
84 N.E. 651 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1908)
Carnahan v. Campbell
63 N.E. 384 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1902)
Dewar v. Ellwood
98 Ill. App. 46 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1901)
McCoy v. World's Columbian Exposition
57 N.E. 1043 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1900)
Kinsella v. Cahn
56 N.E. 1119 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1900)
McCoy v. World's Columbian Exposition
87 Ill. App. 605 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1900)
Hibernian Banking Ass'n v. Law
88 Ill. App. 18 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1900)
Kinsella v. Cahn
85 Ill. App. 382 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1899)
Marble v. Thomas
53 N.E. 354 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1899)
Loverin v. McLaughlin
44 N.E. 99 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1896)
Coleman v. Howe
39 N.E. 725 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1895)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
101 Ill. 57, 1881 Ill. LEXIS 47, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jewell-v-rock-river-paper-co-ill-1881.