New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-07-16
A NEW RAILROAD WAR.

GOULD AND FISK AGAINST THE TOLEDO, Wa
BASH AND WESTERN RAILROAD-A RECEIVER
POISTED-HE GETS $i,S75,OOO OF CANCELLED
CERTIFICATES.
jay Gould agt. AFdridh Z. Body and Others
Supreme Courtspeclal Term-Beforo Mr.. Justice Bar
nard Jay Gould has brought action the owner OF
large proportion Of the stock Of the Toledo Wabash and
Western Railroad for himself and all other stockholders
who choose JOIN 10 restrain the further issue OF by
the Company His complaint sets out the various conso
daons by which the company has arisen out Of previous
companies and that tho company connection with
the Decatur and East st. Louis road Under these
solicitations he says the railroad limited to s6OOOOOO
Of STOCK but had In fact issued but 100000 OF that stock
up to the 18th Of May last On that day very large ad
ditional issue authorized he claims, by bare
quorum OF the directors without consulting the stock
% ne no ans hys n GHsp
issue the stock. He further charges that the purposes
stock was $500 S-5o shares for the purchase Of tho
Wabash Elevator Company. The Wabash Elevator
erected warehouses, &o on land belonging to the rail
roads, with tho understanding or agreement that the
majority u the stock at par Instead of this he
certain Of the directors OF the Company purchased In this
majority OF the stock for themselves lie that the
property OF that Company worth than IT'S stock
at par, but not t5OO,OOO-not than $4,000 lie
hemeVes for their oWn beSo The second and aTse
Issue Of stock for nearly 900 Oooand this issued
contract with that road In this contract he claims
tho directors, or some Of them. have secured undue
menced this latter stock had been issued in 10 certificates
10 brokers TO sell but had not been actually sold These
asked against tho defendants restraining them from dis
posing OF these eertleate and also relief against the
individual defendants. Somewhat similar suits have
been commenced by James Fisk and by an Ohio stock
holder tho latter In that State In this preliminary
injunction, in conformity with the prayer OF the com.
plant was granted and served about the 18th OF June
registry book at the Metropolitan Bank but shortly after
the service OF the injunction most OF their other books
this fact and certain OF the proceeding the Ohio suit
Receiver was applied for OF the alleged illegally issued
Receiver He Wednesday, got possession Of tho Ger
cates for the last and larger issue OF stock but before
UP in Court yesterday on motion 70 punish
Mr.. Azarah T. Body and Mr. Colburn for contempt in
both testified that they had received some OF the fret
i,sue Of stock and had disposed OF g. but claimed that
also testified that the books Of the Company had been
sent away. In MFR. Colburn's examination Mr.. Field
replied under the advice OF counsel they were not
f 10, to 40 80 ey the 6noeon Mr. Field pressed
not forbidden by the injunction IL was mmaterial Mr.
Field said he desired to show that this done
these parties was that they were willing
e sS1%E Dg 70 a %Gs bv NS%Ss money R1t were
We are not willing 70 abide by NeTY9rk Law as now ad
Election the Court, dOesn'til Mr. FulertonI said it
was reflection any one; he meant what every
believed every lawyer would advise any Tch company
when assaed to remove ats property when 1t legally
could. Mr. Field renewed his question, were not the
books removed TO withdraw them from the jurisdiction
Of the Court Mr.. Fullerton objected that he had already
answered that he had done by the advice OF counsel
and the further question Of motive not pertinent
Mr.. Justice Barnard said 1t was wonder that somo
persons should desire withdraw property from this
state. But for rascals whe among us TO do such
things there would be many among US in want Of en-
pOyment The jalls and poor.houses would be drained
Fullerton, with great warmth repeed the inslnuaton
II intended TO DO made against his clients They were
among the most honorable and upright OF the bust
community and this Transaction they should show
entirely upright legitimate, aud proper Nr Field
That docs not appear from the evidence now taken.
Mr. FulertOn-That evidence entirely fpare; they
had had opportunity yet 10 show the merits 10 was
counses duty to defend his clients from all unjust
aspersons on their character whether II eame from the
Bench elsewhere. That duty he should perform II
this was intended as an impnaton on his clients ne
might have matters TO In t that would not be pleas
ant FOR Ills Honor 10 hear. Mr.. JustOe Bnrnaf, ais
claimed any imputaton OF discredt the defendanls
Ho had before had occasion tO try and bring messrs
Gould aud FISK Ut one Lme and Mr. Vanderbilt On an