The Hickman courier. [volume] (Hickman, Ky.) 1859-current, 1868-05-02
our RAILROAD.
Proceedtngs Before Judge Trase
In the Nashville and Norln
western Railroad knJnnc'io"

In Inc NarDvahfo <ssnn
western Railroad knJnnc'io"
Case.
The case of the Kentucky stoekhoid.
ers and Directors of the Nashville anu
Northwestern Railroad Company against
the parties now in possession, on spp,i-
cation for an injunction restraining the
latter from exercising further controi
over the ROAD, was taken up before uoge
Trigg, FL 3 a. .d inst, said he
would first move to file the amended
bill Preferred to last week. and, second,
to enlarge the injunction already grant
ed, by preventing the defendants from
making contracts, etc. 1t was the IN
tention of tn. complainants to ask to be
put in possession Of the road.
Mr.. East, for the defendapts. said that
he would move that theinjunction against
the State officers be dismissed, aud that
the amended bill be not filed.
Mr.. Colyar said the whole case turn
ed upon the acts OF Assembly which had
been read. and as they fully raised the
question, the whole case might now be
disposed OF.
The act of, March, 1864 simply by the
9TH section authorized the Governor 10
appoint State Directors IN roads IN the
condition of the Nashville aud North
western Railroad.
These State Directors were appointed
shortly after that for this road, and they
were allowed by the old Board to take
Their :piaressS State Directors m the
Board.
They were composed of Judge Haw-
kins, Judge Norman, and others, who
acted in harmony with the old Board
During this state OF things the law OF
the 18th of December, 1867, was passed,
by which the Legislature gave or loaned
to the Nashville and Northwestern Rail
road Company $500, 900 of bonds. The
Receiver managed to get 100000 of
these bonds, but upon investigation, all
parties conceded, so far as | know, In the
opinion that the Receiver had no right
to these bonds; that they could only be
issued to or by the order of the COM
pany The Board declined to have them
issued to lines, the Receiver, and the
/ orga MIA ton which is complained of by
these bill (the original and amended
bills.) was set on foot with view OF de
feating the company and giving the
bonds to the Receiver.
The plan adopted was, as nothing else
could be done, to set up rights under
the act of SAe 18th of February, 1868.
This act, Asch was passed for the bene-
fit of an unfinished road in East Ten
nessee, provides that the Governor may
| appoint State Directors in unfinished
roads and although the preamble to the
act of the 9TH of December recites that
| this road is now finished and althoug b
the fact is that way, and the State diree-
tors already appointed under the act of
March, 1867, yet as these bonds could
be obtained in no other way. Commits
sions or appointments were obtained from
the Governor for these fifteen defend
ants, comparative strangers. This Is
! done on the 30th of March, 1868, and
the next day, the 31st, five of these gen
/ tlenen made call for meeting of the
Board of Directors on the I'd of April.
/ On that day these fifteen commissioned
gentlemen met with one of the old
/ directors whom they had Purloined) and
then organized as a board and elected i
/ President and other officers, and ordered
4 the bonds to be issued to the Receiver.
n i.;4l-s.l.-.-s-a- il.st dis haste a
! fraud, that many of these directors live
along the line OF the railroad, some in
West Tennessee and some IN Kentucky.
/ That it was Intended they should not be
present at any meeting they might have !;
that while it is no pleasure to impute
frand to any one, the speaker said he
could not refrain from referring to the
fact. The inquiry naturally comes up !;
when this call was made for meeting of
the Board, and only one day interviewed
between the call aud the proposed meet
lived two hundred or two hundred and
fifty miles away should be present, or
was it intended they should not be pre-
sent2 Counsel we're asked how this was
Mr.. Otis here rose and said be could
say in all sincerity for himself, that he
meant to give the notice fairly
Dir. Colyar said this was no denial of
the stubborn facts that the call was made
on the 31st Of March, for meeting on
the End of pril, and that several of the
Directors 0sed out of the State, and
others distance of over two hundred
miles. The haste was curious, and the
irresistible that it was intended to have
the meeting without the stock holders
Mr.. East here asked, if the reason
they did not attend was the want of no.
tice, saying he understood eight Of the
old Board lived here
DIR. G. said he supposed they had sew
eral reasons, this among the rest. that no
doubt this notice was news to them, that
the thing was just done, and he supposed
the Directors were themselves unable at
once to say whether they ought to at
tend or not. This they could only learn
by investigating the facts aud taking adj
vice. But one thing they could know,
and that was, that a call of this charac-
ter was intended as fraud. that they in
tended by keeping away all the Direc-
tors at distance to have majority
there being fifteen of each set all told.
Under these circumstances this bogus
Board met and organized, and claim now
to have ousted all the officers of the
Board, and to be the true Board them
selves, and they claim that they have
turned over to the Receiver this $780,
600. Has this been done in law is the
question. Can the rights of a corpora
ton be disposed of in this way? Have
We reached the point that vested rights
can be effected by such a proceeding as
this
Since the great case of Dartmouth
College in 4 Wheaton, the law has been
well settled in this country, that char
ter is contract, and that the Legisla-
ture can pass no law affecting it, that it
is impairing the obligation of con-
tract. But here is charter-several
millions of money invested under ia
Board organized, officers elected, aud
IL -