$2.50 per share, and also to pay to Gage $30,000, and in addition 3,000 shares of the capital stock of the Greene Consolidated Copper Company, or, in lieu thereof, $30,000 in cash. Gage was given the privilege of taking, instead of $2.50 per share for shares of stock in the Cobre Company, stock in the Greene Consolidated Copper Company-four of the former for one of the latter the option to be exercised before payment of the second instalment on the stock of the Cobre Company. Five thousand shares of the Greene Consolidated Copper Company were provided to be paid to Gage for his own use and benefit, and 5,000 shares for the use and benefit of L. H. Chalmers, Baker & Bennett, and Herndon & Norris, attorneys at law in Arizona.

It was also agreed that a certain promissory note given by J. H. Costello to the Cobre Company, amounting to $23,000, was to be surrendered to Costello. This note was conditioned upon the Cobre Company obtaining possession of its property in Mexico, and was not to be paid until ninety days after such recovery. It was also agreed that the suits brought by the Cobre Company in New York, Texas, and Arizona should be dismissed. The other provisions of the contract are but incident to those before given and may be omitted. The suits in New York are still pending. All the other suits were dismissed or otherwise disposed of by final judgment prior to this suit. The $25,000 mentioned in the contract of December 12 was for the purpose of taking up and discharging certain notes due by the Cobre Company. It was so paid. The $30,000 mentioned was to be and it was turned into the treasury of the company to pay its debts. The 3,000 shares in the Greene Consolidated Company, or the alternative $30,000, was also for the purpose of paying the debts of the Cobre Company outside of the $25,000 before mentioned. It was paid into the treasury. The 5,000 shares of stock in the Greene Consolidated Company was intended by all parties as compensation to Gage as president of the Cobre Company, and for the time, labor and trouble given to the company's business, and for

money advanced for it and expenses paid in attending to its affairs. Instead of shares, as provided, a cash payment of $50,000 was made to him. The shares paid to Chalmers and Baker & Bennett and Herndon & Norris were intended to be paid as compensation as attorneys for the company for their services in various litigations. Instead of the shares a cash payment of $50,000 was made, and it is found that their services were reasonably worth that sum. The note against Costello was surrendered to him.

The court also finds that the only property in possession of the Cobre Company within the jurisdiction of the court is the money paid into the treasury of the company in pursuance of the contract of December 12. And, finally, the court finds "that the temporary restraining order granted in this action, enjoining the defendants from carrying out the terms and provisions of the contract of December 12, 1900, and dismissing any and all of the actions then pending in behalf of the Cobre Grande and enjoining defendant Phoenix National Bank from delivering up any of the papers and documents held by it in escrow, evidencing the title held by the Cobre Grande Copper Company in and to the mining property described in the complaint, was modified, and the part of it enjoining the Phoenix National Bank was dissolved upon the ground that the District Court in and for Maricopa County had rendered its decision in the suit of the Cobre Grande Copper Company against Greene and others adversely to said Cobre Grande Copper Company, and that as a part of the judgment of said court the Phoenix National Bank was commanded to deliver úp said papers and documents to said defendant Greene, and that as this case now stands there is nothing before the court except an application for the appointment of a receiver."

Mr. Albert B. Cruikshank for appellant.

Mr. Aldis B. Browne, with whom Mr. Eugene S. Ives, Mr. Ben Goodrich, Mr. Alexander Britton and Mr. Norton Chase were on the brief, for appellees.

MR. JUSTICE MCKENNA, after stating the case as above, delivered the opinion of the court.

Both of the lower courts held that the suit had become one for the appointment of a receiver. The Supreme Court said: "The purpose for which a receiver is asked is twofold so far as the record is concerned: First, that he may take charge of the property of the company; second, that he may prosecute its litigation." After some comment the court further observed that the District Court was well within the exercise of a sound discretion in refusing to appoint a receiver, and "that there was not any other relief which the court could properly grant the plaintiffs in the action." We do not find it necessary to decide whether, if plaintiffs' complaint were true, they would not be entitled to greater relief than the appointment of a receiver. We rest our judgment on the merits. In other words, we think the complaint has not been established.

The complaint charges a conspiracy between Greene and Mitchell, being at the time directors of the Cobre Company, to deprive the company of its mines and property and acquire it for themselves, and that in pursuance of the conspiracy they took possession of the company's property. No evidence was offered in the present suit to sustain the charge. Records of suits in which like charges were made cannot be regarded as such. The complaint also charges the contract of December 12, 1900, to be a "fraudulent and corrupt contract and conspiracy of Greene with Gage and other directors of the Cobre Company, to stop the litigation against defendants and to secure to them the undisputed possession of the mines" from which the Cobre Company had been evicted. Both of the lower courts found against the charge. They found that Gage entered into the contract with the knowledge of the directors of the Cobre Company, and in good faith, upon the advice of counsel of the futility of further pursuing the litigation against Greene and in the belief that "the contract was to the best interest of said company and its stockholders." It may be admitted that

Greene's purpose was to stop the litigation against him and quiet his possession of the property, but we cannot assume from this that he was guilty of fraud in making the contract of December 12, or that it was part of a conspiracy with the directors of the Cobre Company to deprive the company of its property. Therefore any fraud in fact is out of the case.

Plaintiffs, however, contend that the contract is fraudulent on its face, and that it was decided so to be by the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York in Hallenborg v. Greene, 66 App. Div. N. Y. 590. The pleadings are not set out in the report of the case. We may assume, however, that the complaint was in most part as that in the case at bar.

The case went to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court on an appeal from an order granting a preliminary injunction and appointing a receiver. It was heard on the complaint and affidavits of the plaintiff. The affidavits of the defendants were by stipulation omitted from the record. Upon the showing thus made the court said:

"According to the complaint and affidavits the Cobre Company was not only a solvent corporation, but its assets were exceedingly valuable; and through conspiracy, fraud and bribery the defendants Greene and Mitchell have obtained the management and control thereof to further their own schemes, in hostility to the interests of the other stockholders, and have actually obtained a contract from the Cobre Company to transfer to these rival companies controlled and managed by Greene and Mitchell all its property and property rights, without even a nominal consideration. This fraudulent contract was being consummated with dispatch at the time of the commencement of this action and the granting of the injunction herein. These allegations must be taken as true for the purposes of this appeal, and it is evident that the inevitable consequence will be, not only that the stock of the Cobre Company, of which the plaintiff is a large holder-owning one twenty-fifth of the entire capital stock-will be rendered worthless, but that there will

be no assets with which to pay the claims of creditors, of whom, also, the plaintiff is one for a substantial amount.

"It needs no refinement of the decisions to show that the cause thus presented is one for equitable cognizance.'

The allegations of the plaintiff were taken to be true, and being so taken the comments of the court may claim justification. In the case at bar the allegations of the complaint, as far as they are passed on, are found to be untrue. The opinion of the Appellate Division, therefore, is of no value to plaintiffs' contention.

We are remitted, therefore, to the contract of December 12. What fraudulent element is there in that? It disposed of the shares of the stockholders and it secured the payment of money to the corporation; it settled controversies which, as far as appears, the company had no means of prosecuting, and which, wherever they were tried, had been decided against the company, and where not decided, in the opinion of the company's attorney, would also be decided against the company. We may assume that the stockholders knew or could estimate the value of the properties. They deposited their stock with Gage to sell, became, indeed, impatient at his delay. We may assume the price of the stock reflected the value of the properties— Hallenborg bought his shares at $2.50. He had an option upon all that were in Gage's hands at that price. He let the option lapse, although negotiation was kept up with him from October to December. Gage then turned to Greene, who, it is found, offered to purchase the stock on better terms than anybody else ever offered. And there was no concealment. Gage was urged by the directors of the company and a large majority of the stockholders to make the contract. It was subsequently formally ratified by the directors and by a majority vote of the stockholders at a stockholders' meeting.

But there were three other elements from which plaintiffs deduce fraud. Gage was given $50,000, as compensation as president of the Cobre Company and other services and expenses paid by him; the attorneys of the company were paid