New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-12-29
THE ERIE WAR.
1pREME coURT-BRooME SPECIAL TERM

,Joseph H. Ramsey agt. The Erie RdiIiray
Company and oRers-M0on by defendants for an order
vi % Tonrt it6ont preSous notice 70 the defendants
nj Special Term OF this Court al penn ~ th9 'Vu p
David Dudley Field aud r. g. snearman, for defendants
the comnsint Is Delaware County But neither the com
plant nor any other paper before me In the ease
and cannot act upon any knowledge have personally
in respect to such matters am, however permtte 10
Court is appointed to be held in year In Delaware
County, at which actions like this are usually tired auu
that term is held on the last Tuesday OF july
-" TIE ORDERS GRANTED
The Injunction and orders in the action were granted
this Court in SAID county, without any previous notice
to the Defendants and without any opportunity on their
mart 10 be heard. The injunction prevents each ana
every OF eight Directors Of the Erie Railway Company
there seventeen in alb doing any act whatever as
director OF the Company; and 1t furbids tho whoIo
seventeen doing many acts which they might iegaiy
do were they not enoned one OF the otderS o
they can have exercise any right privilege or an
hory in respect OF SAID company OF That order also p
points Phio T. Rugges, esq., ms referee ahd ~ give nlln
nqustonal powers aud authorizes him TO take evidence
for certain purposes In the case
GROEsBECK. THE RECEIVER.
The other order appoints David GrOosbeek special re-
cever of certain money propeFfy and claims ana inc
proceeds thereof he collected realized held aud DIS
posed Of Sc The most extraordinary powers are con-
fcrred mon Groesbcck He authorized, upon the hap
penng OF certain event Of when ne II hade ho Juus
and run tho road lie is commanded TO afford
all information in his power, ana ara as ne may ne
able in the prosecution OF tins SUIT. Ana ~ lne
order appointing him. Ruggles is also made referee
with authority to do number OF acts Inc injunction
and orders contain thirty fOos. ana they are very
sweeping and extraordinary for or Pd Orders NO wen
considered precedent has been ctcd ior such ga pum
orders or Injunction; and | confident none can DC
found This injunction and these orders were opsaifa
as above stated without pS S in advance
of trial of the action the merits when 1t NAV appear
from the evidence that the plantn was not ehucu "
either the injunction or orders
THE STAY OF PROCEEDINGS.
served npon The Erie halfway Company the oath day
OF last November, and on that day granted hh oIuei
staying the plaintiffs proceedings except the service on
the summons and complaint in the action on de-
PENDANTS previously served, not exceeding ~ uuS
to enable the defendants 10 make q motion W
some proper county. to have said injunction ana
orders yacared On the seth day OF SAID November,
discovered that my order did not permit the service
of the Injunction and orders accompanying u on DO,
PENDANTS. who had not been served WIN tIe tling, n
ON that day modified order so "a TO allow such ser
vice 10 be made need not cite any authority 10 SNOW
that T. was my duty as ufe S or The duty of any
Judge In the State TO grant snGh stay OF we pia,,
Thar my order was regular aud proper except perhnps
I'm respect TO the abOvemehtloned OmsSI0h' "hUh ~
jured no one, aud which | promptly sspphed Without
O' judges cere aud Parker also very properly granted
orders staying all proceedings by Receiver GToo'oeck'
The defendants were not Obliged 70 make the!r motion
of which they complain They noticed q for the hrst
Special Term Of the Court where IL soud De PI1pGrg
aid regularly heard And pursuant To stlphntlon OF
the attorneys for the respective parties the moon "aS
| al be heard where ~ has now
The plaintiffs counsel niue mVVn ovlolo ,h
Murray at Delhi the 18th day Of the present month
| 10 have nv order staying the plaintiffs proceedings,
vacated But he held that such order was regular ana
| denied the motion. - a, ,,....
or orders in question, because they were granted L
pdItc Is Pages ca. Reps, 4sll Ihey Neie eohpgeu 10
make such motion as this or submit To them. BLt n9
party who shall be defeated on this motion can appeal
S S,n 55 Of fbc Code authorized the defendants to
makeths motion. upon the complaint aud the andaylts
on which the injunction was granted or upon ahuaNNs
1 .g-, xtffh npN
RAMSEY's SMALL INTEREST
The defendants counsel have made the point that the
,n,if as moi sueh an interest In the stock OF the Erie
RaiIway Company, or such claims or demands against
M E,s as siitle hIn 10 the Injunction orders
i'm question IL they 10 concedo that the same were
regularly granted which they deny.
tncs suflcent 10 show that the plaintiff has such n
erest I'm tie controversy entities hun 10 the relief de-
manded in the complaint or the hnu .t I'M
pended directors Of the Erie Railway COmpan! may nave
DONE or may have omitted TO 90. ,,.,,.,,....s
itor OF the Erie Railway Company. aud the owner and
h, o. e lid company; aud that no Is tho owner Of
several min mortgage bonds Of the Company; $50 the
owner Of several Soo bonds OF the Company; also
owner Of several shares Of the preferred ana several
entitled 10 be standing ia hls name on
the books receive o. dvdenS. u further al
lodged that "thero arc numerous other floating creditors
tbs acton ON lis own behalf aud ON behalf OF an other
stockholders and bondhOdeIs $50 far as said stnckhold
creditors q said company who shall join In aud become
parties To tho action, aud contribute TO the expense
thereof IInt am not informed that any other oIsdor
or boudhodtr stakeholder haa manifested any dlspO
stion come into the case on the part Of the PLAINTIFF
The compliant does not show when the paiutln became
the Of his clam for money against the company or
its amount, or ITS character or how 1t accrued. nor
Company when or for what the same was issued
or when the same becomes dV, OF Mnc'.tl aiS tns
his bond.. 10 fails 10 alcgo that tue plain
tin has any sciip certificate Tor stock OF the company
Ip Al
from which legal Inference can be drawn that he is
"eniitJcd 70 have any stock stand Ia his name the
hooks on the company or which show a right In him 10
receive dividends such stock lie has contened him
sclf with stating conclusions OF law respecting his title 10
his alleged claim and bonds and stock Of the company.
4 COMMON SENSE YfEw.
Common sense, well rs law, would indicate tbat the
plaintiff should have stated n his complaint tho nature
aud amount OF any claim past due be has against tho
company by note bin account, or bond or on coupons
80 that the directors could pay tho same and relieve
themselves from surpchslo on at least 50 that the d.
TccOTs who not suspended or enioed could pay IT,
Aud take to be clear that such facts should have
been avered IN the complaint would show the plain
tns title 10 the claim bonds anu stock mentioned In IT,
which he says he owns. Ia respect TO the stock,
none Is shown 10 be standing ~ his name on the
IN The city Of Buffalo agt Holloway g seden. $3.50,
that statement ~ e COZ r tnat by means ,,
OF the defendant TO perform certain acts i not sufficient
unless e Facts To show the duty stated"
Judge selden SAID, IN Mckytng agt Bun 10 n u Reps,
$685. when speaking OF the Code Ii was evidently de-
signed require OF parties In all eases, plain and dis
tnc staemcn! the toet which they intend prove"
For aught the complaint shows the Plaintiffs mere
legged claim bonds aud stock, pretended right To
the same. Immediately before commencing IL. AID he
@ nOi u se dm St That he 'S has against o & R%y
Company, or that payment thereof has been refused
plant gives the plaintiff such standing In court as emit
Ties HIM to such an &C. parfe Injunction or sueh e. pare
WHEN RECEIVERS MAJ DE APPOINTED.
IL was held in Galway agt Inc United states steam
provide for but three In which Of the
property OF corporations (Oher than moneyed corpora
fIoug I'M he 1 "A