New-York tribune., 1869-06-04
THE COURTS.
THE BREMEN STEAMSHIP COMPANY.

The Pacific Mail Steamship Co. agt. Charles
bg ard W.T. Issa Pleas t sResa AT Tern n
fendan were both creditors OF the old North American
other for about 100000 which hens the steamers
OF that company, An arrangement was finally effected
by which new company the EewYork and Bremen
Steamship Company to be created and was created,
and the company morgaged the three steamers the At
antc Baltic and Western Metropolis 20 the defendants
for their claim while the defendants 20 protect
hand CLAIMS to the plaintiff 10 the extent Of s0OO0
The Bremen Company having made default In the pay.
1863 TO sell the ships and the Baltic in fact sold at
private sale and the AtlAUtc and Western Metropolis
we're advertised for sale. The plaintiffs then commenced
this suit complaining that the sale OF the vessels together
would be at sacrifices that the defendants claimed thar
the plaintiffs stockholders, liable for any def.
oienoy and that there were other causes which would
also other claims included In the complaint An iDjunc-
ton granted and the sale OF the ships stopped but
Gated with the consent OF the defendants and the vessels
we're sold but separate, at great loss the Atlanuo
palnt setting up their behalf that plaintiffs had not
fulfilled Their agreement ana asking an accounting,
claiming that such accounting would show them TO DO
entitled to $4,000 The SUIT ran on on the ca!en.
TO the Gth plaintiffs application. On the 26th
the plaintiff entered order for dsconnnanoe eN pare
the defendants to set aside Of dsconnuance
on the ground that the plaintiff having obtained an IN
junction. thereby putting the defendants TO loss, and the
defendants having; as they were advised; preferred
eounter claim In place OF cross bill could NOT now DO
and could not, In case involving nearly sl0OOOCO put
parties TO large expense In securing counsel and then
run away Win tne payment OF Dut Nb
Mr., OCOnOr answering for the plaintiff said that when
he Into the the main object OF the BILL the
separate sale OF the vessels had been accomplished and
examination he found the plaintiffs had no case left
Gt would be hard TO compel the plaintiffs TO try case
whore the defendants compliance left them none. AS
for their losses by the Injunction the defendants had
remedy on the injunction bond; He commanded that
defendant could gain control Of suit by setting Up
counter claim But even II 10 some cases the defendant
could do their counter claims In this suit not OF
nature authorize them To force the plaintiffs TO trial
In q suit where they had no Affirmative interest
Mr. Field In reply argued that the plantn could not IA
matter OF right discontinue after the defendants had by
their counter claim asked for affirmative relief They
could only do IL by leave OF the Court on motion ad-
dressed TO It's discretion aud must show some equity
Otherwise II might happein this case twelve months
had been lOst-that valid claim might be set up as
counteTclaim and the statute OF limitations running
the plaintiff after the lapse OF certain time
discontinue thus cutting of the defendant on.
irely from affirmative relief As matter OF discretion
the Court should not grant this dseOntinuanoe. Ihe
plaintiffs had obtained injunction They had inflicted
on the defendantsa double loss expensive suit ana
the oss accustomed by deerTng the sale IL was SAID
their remedy the bond, but unless there was
Judgment, or It's equivalent In law, the bond was OF no
effect aud the defendants only remedy was gone Ihe
Courts should rown the system, et least the aDuse
OF pdre njunotions 10 should hold their promoters
when they proved 20 have been groundess liable 10 the
full extent or their power. III plaintiff might get an
Injunction aud then without bringing tile case To trla
after gaining all his objects and nnlctng tho utmost
injury tho parties he had attacked discontinue tue
suit for paltry uf ordinary costs, ana leave o no
had Injured without remedy. the whole provisional rem