The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-12-13

The Erie Wharf.-The Argument for n Rchear-
ing of the Order Appointing Judge Davies
Receivcr--The Plea of Jay Gould and James
Before Judge Cardozo.
lugtstsss Belmont rs. The Erie Rdit,UaV ana
Others.-rhe argument for rehearing and, IN fact,
for reversal OF Judge Sutherand's orders made In
the suit OF Belmont vs.. The Erie Railway Company
and the counter-order OF Mcintosh vs.. the same
was brought on last Thursday, but on that day
nothing DONE except to read the mass OF
papers which has accumulated IN the suits
and an adjournment was taken to Satur-
day ut palfpast nine A. NJ. Yesterday Messrs.
T. w. stoughton vanderpoel Porter and Burrill were
present on behalf OF Fisk and Gould and Messrs
Rapalo Barlow and Emott on Ithe other side.
Judge Davies read short affdavit TO show that he
had already incurred considerable expense Us re-
--ceiyer when the case opened by Mr.. Sr0ughton
for his side.
Mr.. Stoughton said that the order which brought
them here was one which was seldom granted. The
result OF that order was to transfer the manage
ment Of a company having some $75,0oo.0oO to
800, 900 to the charge Of one man. With the
greatest respect for the Judge who had made 1t he
could not but think this order was a mistake.
Who no. were ere the partiess II persons desired 70
use the name Of another as cover, and under
shat cover sought to sap the very foundations n
court or equity 10 send them from the court. TO
that point he proposed to address himself frst.
Suppose IL should turn out that certain parties
having what Is called short interest IN Erie stock
had combined to bring these SUITS for selfish pur-
poses, and had conspired to find and induce an
honest holder Of the stock by persuasion, to buy
him 10y promise, TO bear all the expenses OF the
litigation would not this have been enough 10 refuse
the relief asked by the bill That this was the fact
he proposed to show. And first, the complaint was
supported by two afldavits OF Work and brew who
with third. bore the expenses OF the litigation.
Now, the relief asked by the bill was for an injunc-
tion and receivers relief which could not help
hold ffr al hn The
ferests OF the company and reduce the value OF the
stock but II the Kind Of relief persons short Of
Mr. Stoughton read in connection with this Mr..
Fisk's account OF the interviews with Drew. "Lookn
ne said the rascay ana infaIny OF this person."
These statements are. IN fact, confessed The aida.
Wits were made on the 10Th OF November. would
got any decent man have leaped 10 deny these ALE
cations II he coudf Had the other side any con-
tradiction OF this afidavitf
Mr.. Rapaio-pu, two persons could contradict
tbis-MT. Fisk and Mr.. Drew lie had not called on
either for addiional alidayits lie was not here to
Mr. stoughton said the action OF Judge sutherland
was based on Mr.. Drew's atidayit. suppose That
affidavit had included this matter which Mr.. Drew
now confessed to be true OF his purposes In con-
coct,pg this action would not Judge Sutherland
have spurned the applicationg lie called attention
20 the nndened adarit OF Mr.. FISK that oDehalf OF
Mr. Beimonts expenses was TO he borne by Drew
and the other half by Work and Scnel, and also TO
iIat u Mr.. Gould, that Drew had stated 10 him
that they were looking for plaintiff and subse.
Quenty told him that they had found Mr. Belmont.
When court OF equity used Its extraordinary powers
II il 90 different STATE OF facts from that presented
here and ne counsel would have no hesitation, from
his knowledge oil the Opinions OF Chanceors of all
times, in leaving the here, 80 lar merely a. TO
the yacating OF that order. 80 much nc had said as
10 the parties. Now az 70 the bill ITSELF Mr..
SiouQhtOn alluded TO the circumstances under which
the order was granted, and remarked that probably
Judge Davies should have been made immortal, for
there was no limitation the time during which he
was 70 run this road, relief ASKED in the
coInpIgint which went ahead OF the limited appoint
fneui or receiver. But Tor other orders OF TINS
court Jydrc Davies virgin 70 thus KIND Of business,
would nave had 10 rrn ". Now there were In charge
Of this road some seventeen Len, many OF tnem
known by the court and himself and known 10 the
community ~ honorable and able men. VINO after
getting rid OF piraucal crew who were asailing the
interests OF the road, hnd been unanimously elected
10 manage this road. For the misconduct OF three
OF them the court removed all and placed 1t In
She hands OF o gentleman who would consider II as
no compliment TO him TO soy that lie was better
fitted ~ conduct railroad than some other
lawyers. 1le injunction granted er Bdrte was
q Sufficient projection 70 The legitimate pur.
poses Of this bal. u some angel could have
stepped In and Informed Judge sutherland
this order. il was The curse Of the system which
made n the duty OF Judges Oh proper case made 10
grant x ydy ininncffons; that statements would We
made up for che express purpose VI making ~ APP
psrent ease for sGch an Injunction where other pur
psses were sought to be served Than justice, and
That the Judge, alter having ms mind ibfamed ny
these pr DnIte statements, corld scarcely come TO
the hearing OF the NTH thai vacant mind which
was 80 important 10 the administration of Jusuce.
So Nc Old MT wenesE tRal tLe bonea' ana vpExhs