This post is the 9th in a series of posts about the life of my cousin and con man Elridge Solomon Price, Sr. You can find the other installments here: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, Part 6, Part 7 and Part 8.
The year 1948 started out with trials: Trial Dates, Charges, Motions, Indictments, you name it.
 |
| Newspapers.com, Standard-Times, San Angelo, Texas, Monday, January 19, 1948, Page 1 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Fort Worth, Texas, Tuesday, January 20, 1948, Page 3 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Fort Worth, Texas, Saturday, March 6, 1948, Page 2 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Fort Worth, Texas, Monday, March 08, 1948, Page 4 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Fort Worth, Texas, Tuesday, March 09, 1948, Page 12 |
 | ||
| Newspapers.com, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Fort Worth, Texas, Tuesday, March 09, 1948, Page 4 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Fort Worth, Texas, Tuesday, March 09, 1948, Page 12 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, Abilene Reporter-News, Abilene, Texas, Wednesday, March 10, 1948, Page 1 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Fort Worth, Texas, Wednesday, March 10, 1948, Page 1 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Fort Worth, Texas, Friday, April 09, 1948, Page 10 |
"Defendants in Ballinger Robbery Sued for $35,680
Mr. and Mrs. O. B. Haller of Hollywood, Fla., who were present as guests in the home of Eldridge Solomon Price near Ballinger when a cash and jewel robbery was staged there last September, are plaintiffs in a $35,680 damage suit filed in Federal District Court here against the two men who were charged in the robbery.
One of the defendants, Henry J. West, formerly of Mineral Wells and now of Fort Worth, was acquitted of the robbery charge in a trial at Ballinger last November. After the trial, charges against Buryl Walker, the other defendant, were dismissed at the request of Price.
In the civil suit on file here, Mr. and Mrs. Haller allege they suffered $10,680 actual and $25,000 exemplary damages.
They charge that two men entered the Price home armed with pistols and "machine gun or machine guns." The Hallers asserted that because of threats and being forced to lie on the floor they have suffered "intense pain and suffering, mental anguish and humiliation." "
 |
| Newspapers.com, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Fort Worth, Texas, Tuesday, May 25, 1948, Page 1 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, The Blade (formerly Toledo Blade), Toledo, Ohio, Tuesday, June 14, 1949 Pages 1 & 4 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, The Blade (formerly Toledo Blade), Toledo, Ohio, Thursday, June 08, 1949 Pages 1 & 4 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, The Blade (formerly Toledo Blade), Toledo, Ohio, Tuesday, June 14, 1949 Pages 1 & 4 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, The Blade (formerly Toledo Blade), Toledo, Ohio, Tuesday, June 16, 1949 Pages 1 & 4 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, The Blade (formerly Toledo Blade), Toledo, Ohio, Thursday, September 22, 1949 Pages 1 & 4 |
"Maumee Oil Order
(Continued from First Page)
The SEC opinion accompanied the order took a dim view of the Texas property on which Maumee holds oil rights
"It would be misleading merely to describe the (Maumee stock) offering as speculative," the opinion said
In brief, the SEC said the "development work which has been done shows no reasonable prospect of salvaging the original or any additional investment"
Testimony at the hearing indicated that Toledans have invested more than $500,000 in this project
Maumee wanted to raise another $261,400 by selling 2,614 shares of stock to the public at $100 a share
The SEC opinion on the Maumee stock reflected the judgment of its staff summed up at the hearing by Tell T. White, SEC petroleum geologist and engineer, who called the Maumee venture "wildcatting of the wildest sort"
The SEC has no power to pass direct judgment on the merits of any securities, but it can stop sales in interstate commerce until it's satisfied that a company's registration statement and prospectus provide accurate and adequate information for possible investors
Led To Investments
In Maumee's case, in addition to the questions about likelihood of finding any appreciable quantity of oil, the SEC also was concerned about the connection with the project of Eldridge S. Price, Ballinger, Tex., whose chance encounter with Samuel Heath in a San Antonio, Tex., store in 1946 led to the widespread investment by Toledans in oil subleases
Maumee did not name Mr. Price as a promoter of its operations. The SEC held that, in view of his connection, he came directly within the SEC definition of a promoter
Individuals, mostly Toledans, who originally purchased subleases from Mr. Price and later assigned to Maumee, in exchange for stock, their interests in 2,677.88 acres in Runnels County, Tex., paid him between $200,000 and $260,000, the SEC said
Balance Due
In addition, Maumee later agreed to pay Mr. Price $301,640 for subleases on 3,321.4 acres and has paid him $290,340, leaving a balance due of $11,300
The original price for oil rights paid to Mr. Price by investors was $43.75 an acre. This he later raised to $100 an acre while, the SEC found, "he apparently was acquiring additional acreage (rights) at about $1 per acre"
The opinion noted that Mr. Price told Mr. Heath and Mr. Marquardt that he had a criminal record but that he declared he had been convicted and imprisoned unfairly. Testimony indicated that Mr. Price had served a prison term for income tax evasion and at one time was under indictment charging securities fraud. This indictment subsequently was quashed, SEC records show
No Experience
For failure to name Mr. Price as a promoter, and for failure to show that none of the officers of Maumee has had any experience in the petroleum industry, the SEC held the corporation's registration statement omitted "material" and required facts
But the commission directed its severest language at Maumee's descriptions of its Texas assets
Testimony indicated that four wells had been drilled on Maumee's properties, that two of them—in which Maumee owned a half-interest each, along with Mr. Price—were producing oil and that two were dry holes
The registration statement said that one well, called the Brookshire, had an "initial production" of 203 barrels of oil a day
Fixed At 25 Barrels
This figure, the SEC found, was obtained by multiplying by eight the actual production of approximately 25 barrels in an official 3-hour test
The state of Texas fixed the allowable production for this well at 25 barrels a day, but by the fall of 1948 the well had been unable to produce that amount, the SEC noted, adding:
"The registration statement states that since November, 1948, no oil was marketed from the Brookshire well, which was registrant's only producing well prior to April, 1949, for the reason that the former purchaser of the oil discontinued operations and no efforts had as yet been made to locate a new purchaser. However, the record indicates that registrant (Maumee) did secure a new purchaser for the oil in December, 1948."
"As to the production of the Brookshire well, the registration statement is thus deficient and in part apparently false"
The only information in the registration statement about the productivity of another well, the Clayton No. 1, was based on a report in a Texas newspaper. The SEC said Maumee should have made "a reasonable investigation" of this report
Two Unproductive
What's more, the SEC said:
"The prospectus states that two of the four wells are unproductive, but fails to state that the two producing wells have no reasonable chance, on the basis of the present price of oil, to be profitable investments and it is merely more economical to operate them on a day-to-day basis than to abandon them."
Texas State reports, the SEC continued, show that the Beddo Field (in which Maumee's subleases lie) "is an inferior field, which during the last several months has never marketed more than 60 per cent of its allowable production and usually much less"
"All together, there are about 20 wells in the Beddo Field, and an even larger number of dry holes. These facts, material to an evaluation of registrant's properties, were apparently not fully known to registrant and are not mentioned in the registration statement"
Statement Misleading
"The registration statement in referring to productive wells in which registrant is interested failed to point out that they are not sufficiently productive to provide for the return of the cost of drilling and producing oil."
As to Maumee's plans for new drilling to be financed by the new money it seeks to raise, the SEC said:
"Registrant described the projected wells as 'exploratory,' which was misleading without also disclosing the information in its possession that the projected wells were to be located in the vicinity of its two unprofitable wells, and that there was no reasonable factual basis for expecting that the new wells would be better than the two existing wells."
Oil Firm To File Amended Statement
An amended statement to conform with the Securities and Exchange Commission wishes will be filed with the commission as soon as a copy of the commission's ruling is obtained here, Howard C. Cook, Toledo attorney for the Maumee Oil Corp., said today
Mr. Cook returned last night from Washington after conferring with SEC officials
He said that the amended statement will "spell out" more clearly the full facts of the company and its prospects
This amended statement will be filed with the SEC for examination. If approved, 20 days after filing, the SEC will release an order permitting issuance of the additional shares of stock to the public, he explained
Transcription by Gemini Google due to the article's low print quality.
 |
| Newspapers.com, Chicago Tribune (formerly Chicago Daily Tribune), Chicago, Illinois, Wednesday, October 19, 1949, Page 53 |
Elridge's "misunderstandings" of the past always seem to come back around later:
 |
| Newspapers.com, San Angelo Evening Standard, San Angelo, Texas, Thursday, October 20, 1949, Page 2 |
 |
| Newspapers.com, Fort Worth Star-Telegram, Fort Worth, Texas, Monday, June 12, 1950 |
"Suit in Gem Robbery Case Dismissed
Echoes of a jewel robbery at the Runnels County home of Eldridge Solomon Price on Sept. 20, 1945, were heard in U. S. District Court Monday when Federal Judge Davidson dismissed for lack of prosecution a damage suit brought by Mr. and Mrs. O. B. Haller against Henry J. West
The Hallers, who live in Hollywood, Fla., filed suit here some time ago for $35,680 damages due to their alleged fright and experiences during the robbery when two men held up those in the Price home where they were guests. Diamonds were among the jewelry taken
West, who had been in the jewelry business in Mineral Wells, was acquitted later by a jury on charges filed in connection with the armed robbery
Ardell Young, representing West, when the case was called said he had no word from D. A. Frank of Dallas, attorney for the Hallers. Judge Davidson in dismissing the case said it could be reinstated
Transcription by Gemini Google due to the article's low print quality.
That was all for 1950. Things were quiet for now, but it is going to get busy again in 1951. Stay tuned.
