The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1869-11-29
proposition was the fairest,

| the safest. and the best.
Mr.. William Skeen thought the stock
| holders did not yet understand the Hunt
ingdon proposition. The New York gen.
tlemcn proposed to promise 81, 100000 by
the 1st of May next. After that is done,
| they bind themselves only to use their best
efforts TO sell the bonds Of the company.
This is all they promise, and for this con-
| sidcration and their skill. power, and intll-
ence. the present owners are to pay an
enormous sum and allow the road TO pass out
| Of their hands forever. But while it would
pass out Of the hands of the present owners,
| the present president (as vice-presdent),
directors, and attorney, would he more
fortunate. 1t would be run in the interests
| Of Wall street, and Richmond would hardly
nc more than way-side station. On the
other hand, if the contract with Smith tE
Co. could he effected, Richmond, Norfolk,
and the whole Of Virginia. would be built
no, and the Chesapeake and Ohio railroad
would become the great Appian way which
we have been led to expect ii would be. He
besonght the proxies Of the City Of Rich
mond and State Of Virginia at leastto pause
before confirming contract likely to be so
disastrous in its result.
After Mr.. Skcen concluded, Nr. Cha
hoon, Of Richmond. called the previous
question, but the cali was not sustained.
Mr.. Lyons again spoke in favor of the
minority report.
Mr.. Page moved the pending question,
but scaled vote being called by Mr. Lyons,
withdrew the motion.
Mr.. =. II. AyIctt followed Mr.. Lyons in
support Of the minority report. He called
the attention Of the stockholders to the fact
that those who had been the warmeSt friends
of the company when the apparition OF q
bogus company in West Virginia, diSputing
our way to the Ohio, arose are now the
supporters Of Smith, & Co. He claimed that
the contract with McGinnis C Co. was yet
in force, and if that proposed with Hun,
tingdon & Co. were carried out, 1t would
lead to one Of the greatest lawsuits OF the
lgc.
Mr.. Baldwin interrupted Mr.. Aylett to
say that the powers of NcGinnis e Co: as
agents of the company had been suspended
by the President for months past.
Mr.. Ay1ctt, rrSuming,- commented Sc
rercly on the failure of the authorities to
| notify the stockholders on the first day Of the
meeting ofthc receipt OF telegram announc-
ing the arrival Of Ar. Carter in New York,
1ud that he was en route to Richmond. lie
defended Mr.. Carter from the inSinuation
that he was here on wild-gooSe errand,
md claimed that be was rs well backed az
the New Workers, and that there was every
reason to believe that he would do more
for the company. He doesn't charge SS,-
100000 for his skill, nor barter for delay,
nut SAYS for 25,000.G0 in bonds ne will pay
| S, ,OU0. eco in rulrency-not ut some lndcti.
mite future time. but within six months.
The other parties present no evidence oil
| t1eir determination to push the road to
carly completion. They offer only the skill
of Wall street and what. in view Of the
panic Of but yesterday, and the numerous
Whims and caprices Of Wall street spcculA-
tions. j. the skill of Wall street worth?
With regard TO the uncontradicted init
nation of Mr.. Skecn that if the arrangement
with Huntingdon * Co. is consummated
| the president and tho present directory
would be indefinitely retained in power, Mr.
Avlett said, in concluding his remarks, that
he confessed to have no hankcring no taste,
Tor such a result. On the contrary, such q
| result was, in lis opinion as st0ckholdcr.
| greatly IL he depl0red, lie had looked for
ward with great pleasure to the time when
The officers forced upon the company by the
military should be oustcd, and that this
| would be the result when We have iaiI
crack ut them did not admit Of doubt.
When iIr hvlctt closed his remarks, or
motion oi General Echols, the pending
question WIS ordered and scaled vote
1dhtD OH lil'' !fiHtfti' tD
-cDort: which resulted in lis rejection.
The state Of Virginia and City of Rich
| mond voted in the negative.
Mr.. Skccn objected 10 the vote of the
| City of Richmond on the ground that the
city is not 4 StoCliholdcr.
The Chair decided the ohicrtiOn ont o
| order. - the Committee CT Proxies haC
| reported the City OF Richmond entitled TO:
| certain numhcr. Of votes, and as the report
| had been unanimously adopted.
The majority report was then adopted
| the State of Virginia and City of Richmond
voting in the affirmative.
| On motion OF Colonel Baldwin, the fol
lowing persons were elected directors fol
5hc ensuing year:
C.P. Huntingdon. \. a. Lowe, William
II. Aspnwall, Pliny Fisk, David Stewart
Jonas G. Clark, William B. Hatch, II. Chester
| Parsons, John Echols, Williams t. Wick
ham, and Joseph K. Anderson, All but The
| three last named are citizens of New York
| md the appointments were made in accord
lnce with the contract just ratified.
| The meeting then, ut l. O'Clock Z. NJ.
| adjourned sine die.