New-York daily tribune., 1858-12-31

Of the payment Of the principal and interest Of l2
bords of 81, 900 each. issued BY tho Company,
upon which an extension hsd just been obtained BY
Shermans agency Of eight years from the lst Of
January, 1856, at loss to the Company Of
$4,000. With respect to this sale, which was
confirmed at . Directors meeting, at which only
the members Of the Executive Committee and ono
other Director were present, the complaint alleges
not only that it was fraudulent in disposing Of
very valuable property for very inadequate price,
had that price been sctusl'y paid, to party wAo'
a. Director of the Cumberland Company, was dis
qualified to buy of it, but moreover, that the
pretended consideration was never paid, but that
She rman is now, and always ha, been in the inter
val, indebted to the Company for moneys Of theirs
appropriated to bis own private use, in gre'ter
sum than the pretended payments ever made to the
Company for this purchase. The S2S,OO OF cash
was met BY 81 900 already paid BY Sherman, and
for which be had received credit for money OF the
Company previously borrowed BY him, and by
three notes of $4,000 each, which were met %
they became due by moneys taken by Sherman out
the Company's treasury or by liabilities contracted
on the Company's property, and still outstanding
The bonds of the Company are still outstanding and
still unprovided for, except by the undertaking OF
Sherman & Dean to pay the interest and take
hem up.
At the same time with this sale of lands, Ne
baffey also made contract with the purchasers BY
which the Company stipulated to transport the
coal of the mines sold over their road st rates
which. as the complaint alleges, impose an actual
loss upon every tun of coal carried.
Having thus secured his mine and his transports-
ton, Sherman bought materials, fixtures, &c, for
it-so the complaint alleges-which he caused to
be charged to the Company, of which he WAS
Director, to the amount of $ll,24 so, adding
other advances subsequently out of the Company's
funds, to the amount of $4657, all still unpaid.
He also expended out of the Company's funds
S29, 900 for branch roads to accommodate bis own
mines, and $3s, 900 more for coal cars, notwith-
standing bis statement in bis report that the Com
pany's road, with "its present equipment" could
perform twice OF thrice the business done upon it.
He also made other large expenditures on trans
portation account in the purchase of wharves &c,
which expenditures and appropriations of the Com
pany's money to Shermans own use are alleged to
have been the sole cause of its failure.
Thus provided with means of operating, Sher
man & Dean have mined about hundred thousand
tuns Of coal and sent it to New-York to be sold
In August last they organized themselves, under
general act Of Maryland, into The Hoffman
"Steam Coal Company y"-retaining themselves
4,99O of the 5000 shares Of the stock of the Com
pany and distributing the other ten shares among
some citizens of Marylsnd-thus providing stock
holders and directors for the new Company.
The complaint prays that the sale to Sherman
K Dean and the transportation contract may be
set aside as fraudulent and void. 1t also charOn.
,.u,, otbar f,erl. L.vocncs OF trust against
Sherman and Mehaifey, which We have no time
nor space to specify. Suffice it to say, that it
charges against Sherman at the time of the assign.
ment) debt to tho Company for its money appro-
priated to his own use (over and above the
sos, go which formed the cash portion of the con-
sideration for the lands, and which remained
wholly unpaid) of $4,000, whereas he reported
himself on the 3lst of December following, he
being assignee along with Mehafey and Bloodgood,
40 having been at the time of the assignment
creditor for 1872 and as having paid himself
by selling bonds to bis sister, Ann Parish, at q
discount Of forty per cent.
On this complaint the case seems to look rather
dark for Mr.. Sherman. When he answers and
sends us bis answer, we shall duly report what he
has to say for himself
The Court, indeed, has dismissed the complaint
against the Hoffman Company as being Mary
land Corporation not within their Jurisdiction and
has also ntimated that the chief relief needed by
the plaintiff, namely, repossesson of the land,
must be sought in Maryland, where we believe
proceedings have already heen commenced. But
the complaint still stands good against Mr. sher-
man, and seems to demand an answer on bis part
not merely on legal but on moral grounds