New-York tribune., 1868-03-16
THE GREAT ERIE BATTLE.


before Judge Barnard, in the Supreme Court were
interesting from the circumstances that large nuoer
OF distinguished counsel were engaged and that odeIS
had been issued for contempt against seVera Oh le
Directors Of the Company, some OF whom were present
Mr. william Fullerton opened the matter by stating tha
orders Of attachment had been issued against various
Directors OF the Erie Railway He understood that one
OF them were In the custody OF the Sefn ana ne
desired 10 have the return OF the Sheriff read MI d. ~
Field for the respondent, called the attention OF the
Court the fact that any application Tor an attachment
was a violation Of Judge Gibert's Injunction ana there
fore any attachment in IL must be dismissed Mr Fuller
ton argued that the proceeding by attachment was an
Judge Gilbert Mr.. Field read the affdayits, to show
that the contempt proceeding was proceeding on @ ie
old suits Mr. Justice Barnard was OF opinion tat thls
was new proceeding TO see whether there had Deeh
violation OF orders Of the Court,
Mr. Field-NOt initiated by the Court, hope. -
Judge Bd,nard-Certanly not. This Court would be
only too glad to get rid Of IT, ,..,,.. ,,.o,
Mr. FedI understand. then, your Honor decides that
this case must go on, ana most Tespeeuuy' anu anu wn M
all due consideration for your Honor claim that TINS
record that your Honor is interested in this suit and be-
fore your Honor can go on you must decide mat you are
not make. With the utmost respect Tor your Honor,
claim that this matter should not go on before you
fearful that might violate the injunction mat was
granted by Mr. Justice Gilbert ana MI justice % bateoin
intend TO tie the proceedings that were occurring sun
sequent TO the fling Of the Injunction THIS contempt OF
the Court therefore occurring aerward they could not
have intended to prevent that which they cOuld not
oresee would take place md 40 not see any reason no"
mr. Fieid-Then your Honors idea il thst they did not
intend TO stop future proceedings, but past proceedings
T6e Coari-Not for a contempt That is independent
proceeding which they could not foresee would take
Mr. Fed-But the injunction is positive and explicit
that they restrain from taking any further proceedings
Mr. TuAertoH-In what
Mr. Eeid-In an the proceedings mentioned in the
Mr. Fulerto,,-A gainst the Erie Railway Company
The COtTt-As far as Mr.. Drew is concerned
Mr. Field-The gentleman IA very. bold but he Is mis-
fakc Mr.
f1s T,ri do not think IFS necessary 10 discuss this
becase neither Mr. Drew, Mr. Work the Attorney
General has anything to do with this proceeding which is
The names Of all the parties against whom proceedings
issued were then called by the Sheriff. aud Mr. Lane
and Mr.. skidmOre answered.
PEELED 20 plead Mr. Field said that there was proper
course 10 ursue and the other side should know a. The
Court held that counsel for the parties attached dccln
rotrjes s ~ mcanWbfe Mr. lane and MIR skidmore were
Court The Court then put the matter over 10
Monday tho 23d 20 permit the attached parties 10 an
500 bail and Messrs. Lane & sndmore IN
the same sum- stating that he would hold
600 each dispute then arose on The settlement Of
the order Mr.. Field claiming that their objection and
Judge Barnards statement gwen In the order below
should be included In the order of The Court and the
Vanderbilt party, represented by Mr. Hapalo, insisting
settled that the decision of the should be entered
order aud that Mr. Field should also enter an order
The People, &c at pi'sn
Tor. issued ss,s,, isisadsSi alleged violation
.s Objected ts 's % RSSa & igr an .S sI. a. qs s ID ] ]
ng should Ge had Which 96eeos Se,s o."od i ss' ss7 90
tons attachment because be v' pr to 'uoie 'qi oens
Claiming tis he sny this litigation that y
interested IN the slightest degree .h.s directly or sas( "
which objection also oerued aud theupon made order
re u Cause sTis dsdsrt being charged With contempt Of
ors Con,t sbS ~. t.op u he state Of S,wYcS as plaintiff
and Ed Railroad ,ad other. directors Of 'ai ComPsuy DE-
fsn1at Of
issued agsa.t BIN for .ueh contempt directed the C
vheeuron head shns , returned hst be dd attach The aid De-
iendani Drs snd bad hm custody before zoe tolr ana
brought personally b,fr. Court denying rey q u,
sLs Champn Aioraey General 10 behalf Of the People Of the
Mfeb 1861 wih Sic ia the oes o the Cel Of tbs Court at,
roAtoe, specifying The fct, and eum''nee alleged ,gaH the
fensnt counsel sad pa, written
Gs o. o. So 9s @ 49, ~, nd t. ! & 9Sfr 6 or, .. s G ',a
and h., meantime The defendant be dh. g1 bail IN The ,aa
and there ABIDE aud perform TIE order OLe cor. the premises
This having been settled Mr. IT, y CLARK stated that
they had nothing to present to the Court IN inc matter
ton Of contempt settled first. Therefore, II the
other eide willing, they would ASK II should over
come up But they had proceeding. The order Of
the Court had been clearly violated in the issue Of some
prepared new complaint TO reach the pro.
ceeds Of this stock. They had been unable 10 serve
and SkldmoTe Court. IL would, perhaps. be
hardly fair To compel them 10 answer Immediately,
Monday Receiver should not be appointed. MI. Jus
tlce Barnard sand he did why should be delayed
to show cause forthwith. Mr. Dven and Mr.. Lane
found and served Mr. Field stated that the matter was
entirely pdr and he should not argue II If the other
appointed Mr. George osSocd receiver Of the proceeds
Of the new stock directory he TO give security
The following was the order to show cause issued as
Richard sche The Enc Rvsy COMPANY Drew other,
On The 70 this aciou snd ths supplemental complaint
espaG Of G9aa.s Tor Toe ns let the defendant Tls Ee ks.
Sen IL e ciS ri ofbs G efSsTyos sws @ on N. is dsy
Of March 1903 Why The ssd supplemental complaint should pot be td
ss .y seesCs &C. I 1oed o Be .PPo1sd M 81 and singular the pro-
eIhaes for such shares which made signed the secretary Of
Ssls. co%ppy SS ie we're a - @
tended conversion Of convertible bonds Of sand Cmpany authorized by
eS',' 5 az o,ss % ~ p,'fRsd Iss to s o.G Directors Of aid comD,n
Dated March H. 1868 GE0RGE O. BARNARD Justice
The order for Receiver Is to be settled on Monday
The following is the substance OF the complaint on
Which the order for Receiver Is made.
c eo r @5 Neg %f Hs S @ Ssa Is Gc
s 1 2 a9% obG sGE '9s dsa.U sSs ' tho is'
ohe complaint named and Alexander Dven, made defendant
e o. the said ComP,n aud Of the Directors and oee thereof r the
n % III m o Iss a.oo.s 2, h. ~ '
B ye large amount That the smoun Of such additions. shares
50 designed 10 be which have been accordingly issued uBnovB to
DE ptf bat that the he ssceraned With reasonable
is b reference to the facts hereinafter stated That The Executive
OF defendants John
Daniel Drew Henry Gould
Board Of Directors thereof the ninth day Of March
1863 containing other things III, following u,tr quoting
the report OF The Ens Executive Committee already Pubshed which
ratid and adopted The resolution Of the said
Board o. Directors meeting which present ib, defendants
JOhn Edrge, Jsr Gould James Fs if e. Bancroft DAVIS Al
sI,nasr pssa P..ent a Lam. padsy s. Grgoy, william B.
Suoe sBd Henry Thompson all Of whom voted In sor Of sad re.o
lnoB except ihessd Dudley Ggo That time before the
Of the INJUNCTION copied into Schedule 20 ,d original
plant sUneTsd upon the sd Drew the said Company Ito
President aud Wee President had of such bonds been
issued 10 sn lender OF money sreoS had advanced
such bonds been received by sd Us Treasurer
said boBd, hath bonds bees
issued sho had eu the thereof said
That tb tenth March the said See
Of ssd Co IN the en- New o testified ofbe
that there were ID. sIh dy MSrb 1893 outstanding