New-York tribune., 1868-02-18
LAU INTELLIGENCE.
ERIE RAILWAY sTOCKs-DAETEL DREW CALLED |
ON TO REFUND $1,000 SHARES.


ON TO REFUND 5000 SHARES.
In the Supreme Court, Chambers, before
Judge Barnard Frank Work director 81 me rS he nTs Ks
and other directors Of the Erie Railway Company in
wHn 6S hal sS e ah a Th
ment worth 800 per share he sets out the
The New York and Erie Railroad Company The new
Company was formed in ls6i with nSmlray tne sane %
authorized 10 issue preferred stock in conversion Of
tain unsecured indebtedness. amounting 70 about
a. 10000 Of common stock FOR construction pur
poses only Beside this they ,T TeFe aTsnUESsa nrSnoss
stock 10 the extent OF ;o%OO o. 70 pay N%
York The payment OF these bonds extended to 1897
that for that purpose these tOOOO were
the Company was 25loos shares consisting Of sSSTOo
preferred stock $4,000 common stock issued In ex
mon Stock issued exchange for fourth mortgage and
other bonds Of the Erie Railroad Company ana ~
stock part of the 100000 construction stock
Two hundred and shares had been Issued Ier otner
purposes. and they still had the right TO issue ySO
for construction purposes they had also Issued @
bonds in England Convertible m into stock to tn. the
amount Of about 100000 The complaint then
charges that Daniel Drew, being always a dl-
rector OF the Company and member OF It's Executive
Committee was continually & IN s SSsf S s. se Sa
press the stock That for some months previous 10 $500
per share AZ an average 500 per share That being in
May 1906 very largely short TO enable him to I'LL his con;
FTecntiye Committee he procured them TO enter to
agreement To deliver TO him 2sOOO shares construction
them co per cent OF the stock and bonds payable two
years. with per cent interest he TO be at liberty 10
TWO Years that he, in fact, converted his 100000
OF bonds into stock immediately. thus obtaining
the unlimited control OF shares Of the stock for two
years ifor his speculative purposes. The complaint
charges that lie used this stock to make HIS deliveries on
his short contracts. a prices averaging about go per
share and thus place being in advance 10 the Com
pany, was in funds by the amount OF his dnerences
ons Will this stock since he obtained IT, has made large
profits than sufficient TO repay his advance WIN
Drew with his codrectors fraudulent and void and
that he must to the & ICr "a an b pOns tSs Ss
2SOO shares was illegal as being Tor another purpose
was illegal least far rs they were convertible the
Company having no stock To make such conversion.
and no power to issue such stock without pro
ceedings TO Increase their capital and TINT Drew being
OF the directors ID chageabe with the consequences
of any defects In his title stock and must account
for II and restore H. so that the company may cancel
900 shares though it is valid in the hands OF third par
m sTpport " this It alleges that IN their reports for 1866
and 1907 the company have entirely Ignored the Issue OF
The Erie Railway Company made party to prevent
them through the directors from making any settlement
preliminary Injunction bsolute in terms issued
Yesterday by Judge BSTnar S on melton SSSs HS
II appearing ssfseton from the complain, thus Son and
% hsls OsI that The os Ss9ST sSS :. 4 % as GH * : %
s p.n I p p % Of s principal Stsrs., of esrtsis
moneys .&ouans the Of sssOoO ilsssso wSsh ssr.
n. sad Daniel brow O:. Or advance q a. Ps cert SDn .SS
1srS. bonds Of said Company also hon releasing IA
~ e. R'P";I dS ss ss any % % %fTPSs 3. % s.t S
him; aud Do further order that such OF the
Defendants members o. the Executive COMMITTEES Of the
Of said Company do Absolutely des aud refrain nom
Authorizing release settle
men, Of accounts said Company and said Daniel Dps
or auy disposition Of the 1900 shares obtained BY said Drew
@ IT copSy tS Ha 90 further s order that 3 Drew Do
S y refrain % from ssH@s :SS S,. % c x. 5 p1 .S.. % 70
CePsu part thereof and from taking any law. o.
thereof lien which he have claim 70
have npon stocks honda Of said Company security for sad &
eoneerng tho dealings complaint this acop shall
judcay settled and the balance thereof sscersned
George Barnard Justice SaPrems Court Charles kApss ana
Spencer, for plaintas
THE CHICAGO AND ROCKIsLAND LITIGATION
This matter was again up before Judge
CardOzo yesterday, and on seven distinct motions Tho
first motion by the defendants for stay or proceed
ngs until the opinion OF the General Term could he had
upon question Of the removal OF the Fish case 10 the
US Court IL urged IN support Oft that 70 proceed
In the present matter until that decision would De utterly
useless II the General Term should Judge Car
dOZOs opinion On the other hand an afdayt was read
to the effect that the defendants we're seeking delay for
the purpose OF pushing through the Iowa ana Illinois
Legislatures statutes which would oYerf1o the decsons
OF this Court
The defendants at once asked pospOnementt 70 answer
this affidavit Judge Cardozo stated that while he felt tho
gravity OF Involving so much money stll he did
eral term would hear the Argument on the gath.
that would be consideration for postpone
ment; but no understood that they would then
only TO render decaions and their next meeting
till to-day 10 give an opportunity 20 answer the am
davt whom he deodef ~ grant stay OF prooeedings
the main motions woulc OF adjourn over, other
wise he would then day for the hearing OF the main
"A xUaa hu ~