Pococks Glass Works

From Wayne County, Ohio Online Resource Center
Jump to navigation Jump to search


. .

  • Pococks Glass Works
  • Specialty Trade Contractors
  • 1902
  • 1904
Key Persons
    • Wooster, 44691, Ohio, United States

Think Wooster Has the Long End of Glass Case

  • Think Wooster Has the Long End of Glass Case [1]

The attorneys representing the Wooster board of trade in the Glass case expect to win the case against the Pococks when it comes up for hearing this week. As has been mentioned before the case was investigated thoroughly and the very highest authorities on contract law in the United States were invoked, and it would be all right, and that they could win the case.

The matter is simply this The board of trade agreed to pay the Pococks $20,000 and a site, providing they wound locate here, and run a certain number of men. The Pococks located here opened their plant, and ran part of the first year and in the fall did not open the plant on time. When the plant was finally opened it ran only a few weeks. 'There are no boys the Pococks explained, and we cannot afford to run our play with out boys.

The Pococks were never paid the full $20,000 getting between $18,000 and $19,000 but the lawyers hold that on account of the breach of the Pococks the full amount that was paid in can be recovered, anyway. Privately, the Pococks told members of the board of trade that they never intended to ask for the full amount, anyway, after they had shut down their plant for awhile.

$17,500 The Settlement: In Glass Works, History of the Case

  • $17,500 the Settlement: In Glass Works, History of the Case [2]

As stated by the Republican, negotiations in progress Friday resulted in the settlement of the Glass Works' case. Mr. J. C. Haring, of Massillon, and attorney, R. W. McGauhey, came to Wooster Friday morning, and, in the afternoon, Mr. Haring went into conference with John M. Criley and Albert Dix, the committee of the Board of Trade having charge of the case Walter D. Foss, a third member of the committee, was absent in New York and could not be communicated with. The terms of the settlement are the payment, by the Pococks, of $17,000, in full settlement of the claim. The amount sued for was $18,500. The money is to be paid to I. N. Kinney and Albert Dix, who, when the subscription was made, were authorized to sign the contract for the Board of Trade. Many of the persons who subscribed have assigned their claims to the Board of Trade, and this fund will be used for the purpose of securing new industries for Wooster. The amount of $2,000, which was paid for the site, was not recovered, for the reason, that while the contract provided for the repayment of the $20,000 to the Board of Trade in case the factory ceased to operate within ten years, no such provision was made for the return of the money paid for the lot. Then a deduction of a thousand dollars from the $18,500, paid, was given to the Pococks in order to induce them to settle, and the attorneys fees, of the attorneys for the plaintiffs, will have to be paid out of the fund. This will leave a little less than $16,000, to be returned to the Board of Trade.

MATTER STARTED BACK IN 1902 In the Spring of 1902 negotiations were commenced looking towards the establishment of a glass factory in Wooster by the Pococks, who had been successfully conducting an establishment at Massillon. As a result of the negotiations, the citizens of Wooster agreed to pay the twenty thousand dollar bonus and purchase a site, on condition that the Pococks would erect a glass factory, operate it for ten years and employ two hundred men and boys during ten months in each year. The work was commenced some time in June, 1902, and the factory commenced operations the first of Jan. 1903. It ran quite successfully until June, 30, 1903, when it closed down for the summer. In the fall of 1903, owing to the lack of orders it did not resume operations, but remained idle for fifteen months. On the first of September, 1904, work was again begun, but only continued for two months when the factory was closed down forever. When it was found that there was no prospect of the resumption of work, the Board of Trade decided to begin suit to recover the money. It selected as its attorney, John S. Adair, of the firm of Adair & Adair, and when John S. Adair removed, the firm of Kean & Adair took up the matter by agreement with the committee. It was not thought advisable to bring a suit in Stark county, and it was, therefore brought in Cuyahoga County, where Mr. Ralph Pocock resided, and service could be made on him. Judge E. J. Blandin, of Cleveland, was selected to assist the local attorneys in the suit. Many hearings were had during the last two years on various motions and demurrers, and the various contested points were all disposed of except two. That is, First. The question whether or not the failure of the citizens to pay the full $20,000 agreed was fatal to the right of recovery. Second. Whether or not there was any misrepresentations upon the subject as to whether the site selected by the Pococks was subject to overflow. Upon these two questions the case was to have gone to trial in the Common Pleas Court of Cuyahoga county on Monday. The defendants were represented by Virgil P. Kline, of Cleveland, one of the ablest lawyers in Ohio. Mr. R. W. McGaughey, of Massillon and Mr. John McSweeney, of Wooster. The conduct of the suit was in the hands of a committee of three appointed by the Wooster Board of Trade. This committee was originally Frank W. Miller, C. M. Gray and John M. Criley. Mr. Gray after serving a time resigned and Walter J. Mullins and the removal to Canton of Mr. Miller their places were taken by Walter D. Foss and Albert Dix.

SETTLEMENT PLEASES ALL The settlement appears to give general satisfaction Frank W. Miller one of the most astute businessmen who Wooster has everr produced when told of the terms of settlement, said, "The action of the committee in settling as they did shows excellent business judgement."

That part of the fund which goes to Wooster Board of Trade will be used to secure some new industries for Wooster.

CASE WELL PREPARED. The advice of some of the most astute lawyers in the country was secured before the board of trade tried to collect the money, and every lawyer asked gave it as his opinion that the board could collect the money. Judge R. L. Adair has had charge of the preparation of the case, and has worked on it steadily for some time, and ready to present to the court Judge Blandin's firm has given excellent help at the Cleveland end.

PROPOSITIONS WERE MANY. As much as a year ago the Pococks offered to settle for fifty cents on the dollar. One week ago a conference between J. F. Pocock and C. M. Gray was arranged _____ Cleveland. Here Mr. Pocock offered $15,000. A counter proposition was made Mr. Pocock to pay $16,500 cash, and all attorney fees and costs. It was thought that the matter was off and would come to trail, but John McSweeney, a few days ago, arranged to have J. C. Haring come to Wooster, and with the arrival of Mr. Haring. Friday, after once it was thought that the settlement was off again, the matter was finally threshed out, and a settlement was easy. The money is to be paid by December 15.

Quick Facts

  • 1902 - June, Established, work began opening company [3]
  • 1903 - January, Factory began operations [4]
  • 1903 - July, Initially closed down for summer and then remained idle for 15 months [5]
  • 1904 - September, work started again, but only remained opened for 2 months when it closed for good [6]
  • 1904 - Establishment closed [7]

Newspaper articles

  • October 16, 1907: "Hope to Win: Think Wooster Has the Long End of Glass Case", Wooster Republican, p. 2.
  • December 04, 1902: "The Matter Hangs Fire: No New Steps in Glass Case Compromise", Wooster Republican, p. 6.
  • November 25, 1908: "$17,500 The Settlement: In Glass Works Case, History of the Case", Wooster Republican, p. 10.
  1. Wooster Republican, Wooster, Ohio. 1907 Oct 16, p. 2.
  2. Wooster Republican, Wooster, Ohio. 1908 Nov 25, p. 10.
  3. Wooster Republican, Wooster, Ohio. 1908 Nov 25, p. 10.
  4. Wooster Republican, Wooster, Ohio. 1908 Nov 25, p. 10.
  5. Wooster Republican, Wooster, Ohio. 1908 Nov 25, p. 10.
  6. Wooster Republican, Wooster, Ohio. 1908 Nov 25, p. 10.
  7. Wooster Republican, Wooster, Ohio. 1908 Nov 25, p. 10.