New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1870-04-06
" has not been adopted purely for the

policy has not been adopted purely -, for .,t the
of tho stockholders but because the interests OF no
with the present men % tho Road who will not
tell you that tho Erie Road never was 40 well inanaReu
as now was never safe, had so many improve
,ners upon IT, never was nearly perfect before IL IS
true that the improvements are being made AZ ne
pense OF present dvdends true that the Directors
Are using In repairing the road money that the stock
holders would no doubt be very glad to see put lnto
because they feel that freight and passengers could not
be rapidly and safely transported without these In prove
about the 900 that It is alleged has been
ceived the fact is there has been no sj2yoo receiver
Mr. Burt-I did not received; sald Issued
Mr. earman-There has been no such sum received.
We that the price OF Erie stock Is under 80 ana na
every believe that OF the stock which has
sold w snd e ss n the
did not realize TO the Company "a much as 40 per cent
Mr. Burt admits that about sll,OooOo OF that was ac'
Mr. Bart-NO, do not; say that Mr. Crouch states
Mr. shearman~well, do not represent Mr. Crouch
30 500 900 TO- be accounted for at utmost and am
1t can be readily accounted Tor. Whers.sI o 70
u double track there is some OF IL ACCOUNTED LOT "e.
ever there are new depots. new railroad works, new
cateyards, there Is something accOnntea lot suPPs
amounting slsOOOOO in money, accounts Tor some
OF it, Gentlemen tins money can be accounted iOr ana
the time nor the place for that Here you only consider
what Is for tho advantage Of this Commonwealth
CROUCH IN DEFENSE OF tklf
On Thursday the Committee reassembled, and MT
Crouch read long paper in support OF the FISK ana
Gould and against the repeal Of the Cassh
cation act
REPLY OF Mr.. BURT.
Mr. Burt replied upon the whole discussion. He COM
pared Mr. Crouchs interference to the dog which always
ces on the race course at before the Derby be-
gins Mr. Crouch refused to give the name OF single
person he represented His shareholders are bogus aud
lis protest was bogus written In NewYork No one ID
London knew anything OF it, No one in London would
have used the expression "Board OF Stockhoders
There was no such body in England but there WAS In
New-York As to his credentials. he placed IN the Chair
holders stated by Mr.. Gould to hold $1,000
York ready to produce and there were 10000
more In London ready 10 be sent over. Ana ne
wond produce declaration OF the Secretary Of the Lon
don Committee that shares had been registered By
the Committee and supported their action III was OI
H co Of his
ing character OF stockholder and adyocatat com
Two or three oharacters-as an individual lawyer,
and sometimes third party He INT Burtl was only
holder of few shares give him locus Sand and rights
as a shareholder what he could not otherwise obtain
Mr. Sherman had said he knew some OF MS (Nr Butt9
charges be Incorrect Why did he not specify and dis
prove themi He had done and the inference was
that he could not. As TO Mr. Shearmans statement hat
Mr. Gould is abundany able OF himself no
body doubted that but the stockholders wanted Presi
dent who would take care or them lie was ther trustee
ought 10 be the frst consideration II it wero true.
MIR Shearman claimed that his clients owned half the
stock why oppose the bill which left Il to the sockhod
ers to decide themselves who should rule Ii was not
n bill TO turn Gould and Fisk or to deprive them OF
their hard earnings Treasurer and President VICE
President and Controller 10 remove the elegant mono
grams &C. and +. intertwined which now adorned the
temple OF the Muses. and the railroad IL was stated tha
he had invited examine the accounts lie denied
that such offer had been made by any one or that
Mr. Gould had promised o.use his Influence 70 appoint
Directors he should nominate He complained that 10
weeks lac could geta copy OF aud that
Mr. Gould had not answered letters asking Tor hIor'
nation to the regulations OF the Company AS 70
Mr.. Shearman's arguments In favor OF the Classl-
fcation ac,, he stated that the Pittsburgh act was
ike the Erie act and 1t was passed only one month
before the Erie bill brought in so that there had
been no experience OF its working. As to THE bill be-
Inr passed TO protect the line from Vanderbilt, he
showed that the act OF 'lsGS did all that could be Done TO
this end, and nothing was proposed to be added by
Mr.. Sherman said 1t was passed 10 secure men
York to manage the Erie Road but there was 10
such word in bill, and the Managers might live in
Francisco Australia for aught the bill required
But the great argument that the bill passed to
protect State of NewYork to prevent the road helng
instrument OF extorton aud the rates OF freight
from being raised-that Gould ana FISK were the great
opponents OF monopoly. So then appeared that was
the safety and welfare OF the great stale OF
New.York that Gould aud Fisk should be Managers OF
Road for i've years! Had 10 really come To tnsf
would bring its retriOution so the Harlem Road
second ne aud the steamboats, were far better for
public than the original line alone however low the
rates, and IL would always Do. Competition would
always keep down monopoly In a free country.
There no such provision 10 the charter Of the ETC
ferent from railroad charters f the classification
really required for State would have
been imperative aud not permissive, and would have
But was the mana cement Gould and Fisk for the
of the people OF the stockholders The following
paper would show:
Erhacts from Reports Of Ere Ropay Company 10 State