The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-12-05
not |, will not come on be thought, for nine months

Mr.. BEn1s, OF New Haven, hereupon called for tho
Der, which being done, and 1t appearing the rssoiu-
tions there adopted passed. but it not stating By
what species Of vote that be inserted that
the resolutions we're carried by a pira roce vote.
Mr. vERAnYEA seconded that motion. which was, how
The Secretary then read the act OF the General
Assembly OF the State of Conneotieut authorizing
the directors OF the New York and New Haven Rail-
road Company 70 settle and compromise claims
growing out Of controversies relating to fraudulent
issues Of stock &c. under certain restrictions pass
May g. 1854. The bin authorizes the adjustment OF
the claims ON said company growing out Of fraudulent
issues of certificates Of stock and other practices BY
p,al stock two millions of dollars It Is stipulated ia
the act that shall nor take effect unless accepted within
meeting specially convened for the purpose
Mr.; vn'AIrEA Of New York proposed, seconded BY
hI; Fst'. o. New haven, that the acs be accepted.
Mr.. BRADFORD, Of Boston, to oppose the notion
He menced by expressing hs disappointment be-
ing compelled frequently to intrude his opposition
the measure since the last meeting Of stockholders
he had discovered why he or the friends who
be represented should alter their previous resolution
the motion before the house. He not astt nshsd
that The holders Of spurious shares should press have
such an act passed out it would excite his amazsm mt If
bis should receive the support sustained by
he meeting. he believed there were various good rsa
that could be for the contrary Many
o1 speeches and several touching appeals mad been
mace mt former meetings but notwi hsanhng these he
had not been convinced; but he rather felt the de-
srmnsd that thar act ought not to pass 10 would cali
tho attention OF the citing to what had taken pl4ce
with respect TO the meeting Of the STOCKHOLDERS
since the first meeting II would have been sup
Schuyler here would have been appointed the meeting
committee charged to have waited the directors
emergency. Irsess that meeting called in New
York. and AZ preliminary notice the stockholders
fight on that occason-tDas the members would
peile 10 ADOPT these spurorl sharstbat committee
had been chosen the pa Of the stock exchange and
hsd been supplied with funds 10 carry their point
the recognition of Tins spurious issue Tie could
understand how it should be question Of the stock
change, when there housaod su sibers
to the stock But the country folks had ut length dis
covered tia. great number of brokers' had been notified
by their customers that they consider themselves
personally ponsoie, unless this declare
be g. od BY 'hs company. 10 this way you may iearn
who lie yrnca actors connected Vi this proposed
He did deny them the right from any
tive would he speak ds aragingy ofany because
tina, he consic cred very natural that they should
to throw their respon oity the shoulders Of
Others but he did wish that the de holders should
understood tire question to who they that In
favor Of ping this Out OF ths pernci inhu
people cecidedy opposed to the recognition of
these shares and nsts Of witnessing change In the
whence he came they decided nov than before
that the oct ought not to be accepted knowing such
larger proportion OF proxies put in his bancs and In
had he been nsruc ed to vote ia of this
sI ~ s 81, pSs;, If M ia the ~ is
in accorrance with the best legal advice, ADD as
advised ty The present Boaid Of Hrecois Disiatcre
cd lawyers state That they do no, how compromise
can be effected, and they say that he company Is not
liable. At every. meeting the holders had passed
solutions nsruc,ng the nonrecogntioe Of these shares
and vain locked any thug giving to
change decision. He believed that if courts
If New Yok bad decided an isolated case mere there
seanst The company, these mad been decision their
siGe What would be the equence Of ptng this
act to-dayS At the n,zt meeting there wouli be
beard be changed they might not all be the most up
right Of anc then how would they use their powers
given them ty this act Another why tn,
should be decided by Legal tribunal is that tho parties
to whm this spurious stock was issued OF at least
party who committed the frsnds. BE would ask, such
being the case it was not case specially appropriated
the facts which would 10 some degree otherwise be sup.
pressed For himself he not willing to place ~
GOO in the hsnds ana power Of any board OF aecors
had been laid that the company would be sten BY law
expenses and the law delays The railroad that would
thnk law disputes would get in existence;
and TO delays he did not believe It bad that yet
He believed that parallel cases could be found decided in
Of the United States and Of England in favor Of
companies under similar circumstances. He In conclu-
That the acceptance this act postponed till the
Mr.. BE11s Of New Haven, followed in reply. Hc con
sded 1t 10 be Of the first Importance that the members
ef the corporation should what they
called en- vote for against juggling from the
fweepiDg remarks of the gentleman the other soe he
should roy ,h,t that i.osissss was not very general
objects Of the mteng The Legislature ct Connecticut
hid pas,d certain act which the steaker seemed to
suppose act proming ain claims. The
has 1een read, 1t Is fouLd to contain any
uch provision. 1t Represented TO tae Legislature OF
that their agent had ssasd to innocent par
ties ,ctes that they were holders Of stock In this
l
not extend. There were two three very particular
predicau ens in whichthe company might stand sup
tho fact TO be that determination could be had
10 which genuine and w lea spurious stock. Hefe
il Fix millions Of stock in the marke., held by
be- hut
He then narrated the crcnms stances Of lady OF some
.esi,h, who, marrying and having full coat fence il
name this he did in the New Haven road but Don
his death she desiring to be transferred sent and
IL curing THE Schuy regime when he sod har
| tifcatc tent her ale-s return toy
the honest holder of the stock-the widow-is
ruled out, while the of the stolen stock Is che
member OF the company Ibis ia single instance, and
lawyer he could say that these facts
you e on ure Of
stances that the evidence OF these records Is entirely de-
sttoy because the WHO kept them did make, and
in The habit of making, fse entries; and that you
free from blame because did not provide any
check to prevent his doing so and BY which 70 detect
stock to ano,her man 70 whom she soid It, and she End,
That there ia power in your corporation to do be
icrred One object q the law thcn, is 10 enable tn
company to correct just such abuses Looking at thi
ration say that an upright, honest holder Of what il
called spurious stock Is to be sufferer for thu
seemed to him that as honest men, the stock
holders ought TO together and what is right
between man and man IN the case l. right that when
shall be turned forthwith cut OF possession OF his rights
and that the company shall say they Will not put
themselves in podiion to examiner lie, aione settle
claims for the frauds OF the compsny's servants.
kev. s. BrIKIRy Of Danbury, asked Of the speaker
whet or he didn't repreent much larger proportion OF
spurious than of genuine stockf
Mr. BrTa SHARPLY replied that he did not know that 1,
wss OF any importance to the nterrogator lie did moi
intend 10 any but hs true For himself
he had no interest ia the company either way
other, but he present to Argue the In behalf
thce whose proxy he 70 state TO the meeting
what in hts honest judgment he believed to be theft
duty without any other interest IN the decision but
tho welfare Of his clients should be concerned Of whom
he represend parties holding both stocks-the and
cid.
Mr. Tmars, Of Stspsbury Conn, desired TO DO inform
ed ty the gentleman who had the foor IT, having failed
in the law bufness 1t would not then be practicable to
accept this act and then come in and compromise.
Mr.. BE1Is continued in reply. Hs remarked that
| the acceptance OF the act Is stipulated for In
| twelve months from the date Of Its enactment
| DULY - 1885, and Il Is not decided on before
decision Ia rendered In the before the courts CON-
promise would be out of the son with many OF H.
eans for the decisions should against the company
it,xn fhc acnIa 4lon