, 1869-05-07

9aa 1s1ed edfs s.stes d. % "a ssfsa alaoeo e
s nd "'t2s Nc ~ n's 2ses g -
ga, ,tsEen ssoek, bat nsd PAID for IL themselyea
go q Moes e., 6so 3 EN- n11a,s 81 sna
Tss. ,ns = be uadrstood tne a1sr o ths 6onsEao
ion Company He ~ President Of that compan!
"a y ea tS5 m .ao S
Iamba1n WAS one Some Of the stoekholdcFs Of
mat COMPANY took their q ares. ~ Lambar,l tax
rSfs @ IN ms g7asooo; 47sooe of this SUBSCRIPTION
MS t4ieu by outside parties He hah taken Part
The "a ssa 81 s5 q
m original Subscription He eoasinsse4 tnls tnas- l
ter aa entirely Ennsacaon with the Iowa COD
ssas19a S. Tsa Wi ssnase, To1ts ~. r I,ba7i
had previously testldea shat he thought the stock
Of the company worth 1tl3 3--~,
Of any agreement Or understanding - 70 The Tor
rp4Non of the company He was not sure which
Of his subscriptions he made RefsonsY IA wn,ea
done for him he had ratded .
M Crane. on behalf Of the defendants, argued
hat .ssss wss n9 psoe Of sny s pos 70
Of the assoclaiex, the only testimony 70 that enet
being that Of the platnttr q to soue conssssa:
oon;rscx, Il M, WAS hascd ou tnn consideration Of
fnf~rest with Cpusressruen, sud therefore Against
gapA,s A,s pesy tn4 yn 70 Tes e e e
Tnie ID Europe uas not proved but u Il hal been
wns no ground for recovery In this action Tfcre
| was no proof Whatever connecting Mr. 3rnes Ttih
the matter. nor an1 ground Of actton hGans: the
corporation, since 1t had NOT made or rasoed the
| contract, HI. LanhaTd, having been Director O.!
| the COMPANY, and knowing All IT, octz, Mas pre-
Guided from making claim against It The In
| crease of stock IN which plalnl1 clGned = saafe
| was subscribed u about 100 tone a1e purchasers
| as to whom no Special agreement was pFctea'!ta.
The rlaintt1 nad failed to pay his n-st sahscri?,
don, ana i vas merely through Bia:rs good VII
thai he obtained any Interest taxing none o. the
/ bus1!en on himtelf i'll By Dlatr's anu Ames e~1H
1t Tas demonstrated success
Ar. Field, On behalf Of the palnun, argued thal
I'll the f:c.y necessary tn HI case were ad.nttee
| or clearly proved The company Was formed OF
| the basis Of tu ag1eement snch "a stated by Nj
Lamhald, aud tnis agreement MAS repeatedly rec
ognlzed by the company In the mIuutea ot ia M
rtcsura, even In Lle re1J. resolution .utno1l lzi1a
the Increase Of stock. Mr.. LAmbltu had ciearil
| stated IN 1gtceDent WITH MI. Dlattr and MI. Mell
had nnt really denied II, but only that be dtu no
remember It encuy, and had sorae other tn:e.
presatiou Of T. There had been references Of tni
Committee, 'hut there han hecn no meeting Of ths
ExecutiFa Comtlitteer bat Nj. blatr aud NJ
AInes h3d taken on thetnseivea to open ilttt
books for subscriptions. and had recelTed f9s5o,
000 OF subscriptions Ne LanhaEds demand Q
his share and oGer to pay the assessments VAS ad
comply with tha deuuand .The company, Nj
Blalf ind AE AnacA, were the guilty paftles tn III
matter, and tbs Judgment should be against then
Jointly. To main up Mr.. IAE1harut ninth h
shoQld receive = TT ,shAreA It wxA shono tha
these Shares wcfo worth 80 more khsu the nsees1
EneniA The Judgment shoald therefore be etthe
that they deliver to AE. Laxohard = 70 ahares Q
they smy htm Seee, 90 In cash.
| The Court reserved its dec1atcn.