The New York herald., 1868-03-20
Settlement Of the Order Appointing
o Receiver.
a New Suit Commenced In the Drew Interest
and a New Injunction.
The New Injunction Dis
regarded.

Before Judge George G. Barnard.

developments In the great litigation which miRh
with pr0prety be entitled sNarrow Gauge VS.. Broad
Gauge, &c" Among the counsel present on the Van
derbilt, or antl-Drew, side were Charles O'Conor,
william Fullerton, Charles A. Rapallo, Horace r.
Clark and A. ]. Vanderpoel. On the opposing side
were David D.. Field, Augustus r. Smith, John E.
Burrll, d. D. Eaton, Dudley Field and Mr.. Lowrey.
} At half-past eleven O'Clock Mr. Clark led on by
moving the settlement OF the order appointing George
a. Osgood receiver of the proceeds OF the issue
OF $10,O 600 worth OF Erie stock which was
accomplished the 9th instant In violation of the
Injunction granted by Judge Barnard at the suit Of
Richard Schel. The order appointing the receiver
was made on Saturday last at the close OF the con-
Tempt proceedings against A. s. Dlven Vice Presi-
dent OF the company, who was charged with having
signed the certificates Of the new issue. The settle
ment OF the order was adjourned until Monday last
put when the case was called on 1t was found that
Judge Clerke had granted q stay Of proceedings,
Setting 1t down for hearing on the first Monday Oi
April
/ The case, therefore. more properly expressed,
came before the court yesterday morning on the re-
return OF an order to show cause why the hearing
should not be had at an earlier day.
Mr.. Clark proceeded to call attention TO these facts
In very lengthy address, and, referring to the en-
ployment OF an attorney named Diven, at Elmira,
who appeared as the attorney OF record In that pro-
ceeding, contended that 1t was done merely for the
purpose OF embarrassing the plaintiffs In their efforts
10 obtain justice at the hands OF this court And it
was questionable also whether Judge Clerke's
order was entitled to the respect that
was accorded to 1t on Monday last. At
Ibis moment there were no technical I'M
pediments to the court doing ample justice in the
matter. 1t was urged that on the former occasion
The defence had not had sufficent time to prepare
q m in all-
lection now. The gentleman then gave brief review
pf all the proceedings in the other suits In the gene
fa litigation, and was referring to the dissolution OF
Judge Gilberts injunction, as reported in yesterdays
HERALD and the circumstances under which that
order was granted. Mr.. Clark, after brief confer
with associate counsel, said that he had become
impressed with the idea that there "might" be q
technical impedment" still in the way. He stated
that he had just been informed that another njunc
tion had been nterposed granted by Judge Clerke
and enjoining all proceedings in the matter OF the
appointment OF a receiver. lie would ask the court
1f 1t were practicable to request Judge Clerke to
take seat beside him Judge Barnard on the bench
an order that he might hear and be advised Of the
probable erect and result Of his action. Mr.. Clark
then referred to the various preceding nunctions in
the different suits, but more particularly to that
which Judge Barnard had been enjoned, and tracing
it through It's various phases substantially as
,au, no ~ 'he naAcp oi yes.erday III .ne afgn
OF the Beldcn Injunction. The aiidavits OF Cornelius
Vanderbilt, Richard Schell and other parties who
had been charged, In conjunction with Judge Bar
Nard with conspiracy Judge Clerke's original stay
OF proceedings was also read, and in regard TO 1t Mr.
Clark said that II was an unwarrantable interference
by brother Justice in this proceeding and one which
lie hoped this court would not fail to give proper
Sideration to- Judge Barnard had received his uris
dicton from the people who had clothed him with It,
and when he had done with that power 1t was his
duty to returntt to the people unsorn OF Its dignity
and strength.
Mr.. Rapao at this stage OF the proceedings read
the following
AFFIDAVIT OF JUDGE BARNARD.
SUPREME CoURT-KINGs sCoUNTY.-Valfdm Belden
as George G.. Barnard, Iplpiedded 6c.-Citp and
County Q Netc York, ss.-George G. Barnard, being
duly sworn saith-That he is not now and never has
been engaged, directly or Indirectly, either indivdu
ally In conjunction with Others in any speculation
whatever in Erie Railway stock or any other stock.
lie further saith that he is not now and never has
been in any combination with Cornelius Vanderbilt,
William II. Vanderbilt, Richard schell, Augustus
Schell, James Ii. Banker, Frank Work and
Others, or any one or more or them, or
with any person or persons whomsover, for either
specializing in The stock OF the Erie Railroad Com
pany or for that purpose to aect the price thereof
by proceedings In the courts that he does not know
whom the stock broker, Henry n. Smith, chooses in
his aildayi TO designate by the name OF the 'Nan-
derbilt party" and can, therefore, only meet said
Smiths allegations that Is stated in the newspaper
press that this deponent IL In close conference daily
With said Vanderbilt party In the said operations by
asserting In broad terms that he has never had any
conferences whatever, whether close or otherwise,
with any person or persons whomsoever, in any
operations, speculations or combinations in said
Erie Railway stock, or any other stock.
Deponent further says that III Cornelius Wander
bt, William II. Vanderbilt, Richard Schell, Angus
tus Sohei James ii. Banker Frank Work and
speculating In the stock OF the Erie Railroad Com
Pany, or have heretofore combined or still remain
combined for specializing In the stock OF said com.
pany, for that purpose TO aect the price thereof
by proceedings In court this deponent Is not party
therto nor In any way connected herewith, or in
terested therein, and he has not the slightest
knowledge or information concerning the same and
as 10 the allegations contained In the alldavit
OF william Beden, sworn March T. ls6s before
Morgan Notary Public, that this deponent Is In the
constant habit OF resorting to Broad street and fre
auenting the Office OF one of the principal firms Of
brokers who engaged In the transactions In said
stock this deponent says that there Is foundation
IN truth for such statement unless II be that this de-
ponent has occasionally from time 10 tlne for seye-
raj years past called ut the Office OF the firm OF Fow
1cr, Osgood Co., for the purpose or meeting
George A. Osgood gentleman IN some way con-
nected with said firm (bu In what particular this de-
ponent is uninformed) and whose relations with this
derJnent are exclusively OF social char
acter; but this deponent saws that the said
afiidavit. In far as II seems TO insinuate that
this deponent Is in the habit OF resorting to
Broad street or to the oilce OF any broker
Tor the purpose OF mngling In stock transactions OF
any description, or concerning himself therein In
any fern y manner, is wholly false and unwarfanted
and this oeponen regards II his duty to inform the
court, and therefore deposes, that any ard every
statement or insnuation In said complaint or In the
affidavit annexed thereto, which directly or indirectly
charges this deponent with concert COLLISION with
fhe defendants or any OF them for the purpose OF fur
aherng stock speculations or with the design TO
lend his Judicial powers TO any such purpose Is with
Out the slightest foundation in truth aud this depv-
nent leaves TO the court before which this action IL
pending TO determine the purpose and objects for
make his defamatory accusation.
And deponent further says that neither the firm Of
Fowler, Osgood n Co., nor has the said George A..
Osgood, ever purchased for or sold to dep0nent or
entered into ans contract or contracts on deponent's
behalf or with deponent for the purchase OF sale Of
any railway shares.
And deponent further says that he has never been
interested, directly indirectly presently or con
fingenty, In any form, way manner, In any stock
or railway shares purchased sold by the said firm
Df Fowler, Osgood Co., or the said George "A. Os
good or In which they or either o them have or ever
have had any interest," directly or indirectly.
And deponent further says that te has not In any
way, directly or indirectly. any present. future or
contingent interest whatever In the result OF any
either Of the various actions growing out OF this
froversy; nor will the same, under any circun-
stances In any way, directly or Indirectly, result 10
the personal or pecunary advantage OF deponent.
And deponent further says that he has no knowledge
or information as to whether said nrn of Fowler,
Dsgood a Co. Is or is not one OF the principal firms
of brokers engaged In buying said Erie Railway
btock. GEORGE q. BARNARD.
Sworn 70 before me this 18th day Of March, 1865
JonN G. SHAW, Notary Public, New York city,
Mr. Clark argued that they then before the