The New York herald., 1870-03-19

told him we were ready to carry out our arrange.
q. Can you tell how large the capital stock OF the
company was at that timer A. About thirty-tarss
Q. What is IL now,
Mr.. Pleld-I object to that
Judge Barnard neld thas II was immateriaL In
ms Judgment It was not pertinent to.the issue now
pelny tried, and secondly II might be the means OF
lons TO persecute the company.
Mr; Davls-I hope your Honor viii exculpate me.
Judge Barnard-Oh, DO not mean any one here.
q | now ask you II the capital stock u not
AIR. Eleld-well. must object to that.
Mr.. Davls-I desire TO press the question. What is
the present amount OF the snare capital OF the Erie
Railroad Company
O. What was the amount on the 10th of December.
1867 Objected TO and ruled out.
Q. What was the share capital at the time you
made this tender to MIR. Vanderbilts 0bjected to
MIR. DAVIS proposed to show that BY various trans.
actions the value 0f the stock had been reduced from
The Court ruled it out, because 1t did not appear
In evidence that, at the tme the tender was made
the stock IN consequence OF the rall in price.
Mr.. Davis then proposed to show that by the mis-
paay the stock had been decreased from 70 60 "a. Am
Judge Barnard-It IL ruled out because II opens up
question that would take the balance OF my life to
Mr.. Beach-we now call upon the other side to
produce the Dook containing the minutes OF the
:. Mr.. Field produced sworn copy, but objected to
the production OF the book.
Judge Barnard-Ruled out, because you nave no
right to IT, although you nave q right TO sworn
copy. When you call for the inspection OF paper
you are not bound TO produce II In evidence.
Mr.. Fleld-I oner the gentleman sworn copy.
Mr. Beach There s nothing In the vcrliication to
contradict the possibility That the record was altered
last night or TINS morning. do not, OF course IN
sinuate anything. but the veri1canon u not salts
factory as | would desire.
Rarnavd Sat thnro liz ln ohta a.
have the verncatOn made more perfect.
discussion mere ensued as to the production OF
TIC DOCKS Ol the company.
PIRATES AND CoNspIRAroas.
He.ulrect-in MS redirect examination by Mr..
Field the witness testified as foiOws:-
e. Mr. FISK, you explained how you felt when you
left Mr. Pierreponts house. and stated you had been
with the robbers; now, what dtd you mean by that
Mr.. DAVIS objected. Overruled
Witness-lf there's any mlsunders anding III ex.
plain. (Laugnter.D
Mr.. Beacn-Oh, don't trouble yourself. Question
repeated. A. / meant that an entire change mad
come over the position III the acts we had done
towards the corporation; up 20 that point they mad
with them; they always excluded us IRON their
arrangements and their trades; they knew we be-
repeatedly stated would not take dollar from Tie
company; law had been passed making 1t State
prison offence
Q. VINO were the robberss Objection overruled.
2. Who did you mean by robbersr A. The people
who took the money-Schel, Work, Vanderbilt,
Kapalo and all the people iound IN ths combina-
ton. Q.aughter.l
q. what did you mean by saying You had been
with them ever SINGER objection. Oyerruled.) A. /
meant that up to that time, after lapse OF seven
months had fought this schemlng night and day
and tnat alter signed the paper was well aware
mad done something should not have done, and
SOLD NY SOUL OUT
10 them; when si1ned the paper felt that had
given up all the rights OF the position had taken
and mad gone upon their base.
q. DO you mean you had entered into the scheme
to rob the companyY A. NO, Sir.
q. Have you had any combination with thems A.
Only to collect this money back.
q: Have you been associated with these robbersY
A. No, sir; have Deen connected with then IN no
shape or Inanner have taken stand. determined
to get the money back. That hes been my only con-
q. Is the attempt 10 collect this money back the
only connection you have mad with tnems A. Yes,
Q. In your last interview with Mr.. Vanderbilt did
he say IT had been definitely agreed that he would
take ST. 25U 600 bonds 0f the Boston, Hartford and
tnat interview spoke Of Mr.. Rapalo ana OF Mr. Work
as being & his 6roker % ana representa.iys; he also
to him. that he lvanderbiltD
CONTROLLED THE SUITS,
which would pc discontinued II he were settled with,
he said that BloodgOOd's was brought in his in
terest; he spoke OF Mr. Banker and Alr. Stewart az
new directors, but those gentlemen never took Gher
seats.
Mr.. Field offered some documentary evidence in
reference TO fhe settlement and the case for the
Mr. Rapallo for the defendant, offered in evidence
documentary evidence OF the discontin uance OF the
several suits.
MOTION FOR NONsUIT.
Mr. Beach then moved for a dismissal OF the COM
plant. He said 1t devoved upon MIN to renew the
motion previously made. In the course OF the trial
the Court recognized the true character and lmpOr-
tance OF this action, and It had been SAID by counsel
and he thought by the last witness on tho stand that
II was not only memorable but had become historic.
THIS was On action brought by one OF the most PROM
inent corporations OF the city TO repudlatc settle.
made by the de berate acton OF the Board Of Direct
ors. 1t was brought to recover money from pr0mi.
nent, well known citizen upon the allegation that
had become fraudulent consplratOr with the oii
GERS Of the company to defraud and plunder Its
treasury. And the Odium or those aflirmances IN
the complaint had been intensified and emphasized
by the testimony OF the last witness. who mad not
hesitated, in the peculiar and unique manner which
distinguished that Witness to designate all the par
ties TO the transactions 8s plundsrers Of Erie
Railway and as
UNCoNscIoNABLE koBBERs.
The gentleman who happened to be the defendant
IN this case mad before borne an unsued reputation
IN his business relations; he was placed nDove all
temptation to sully his good name IN the charge he
was associated with mary h0nOred names; the de-
nunclatlons had been extended to the bench ITSELF
Tnc SUIT was brought in the name or the Erie Ran.
way Company, but IN reality to carry out their OBJ
jects and reach the ends they proposed In this lti
CATION. Counsel thought he was not unjustlled In
saying that tnis was prosecution Instituted by Fisk
and Gould for the purpose OF gratifying malignant
designs o revenge and retaliation AGAINST the de-
fendant-the last witness In his testimony
knowlcdges his fidelity to the trusts and his anxiety
for the interests Of the Erie Railway Company: In
fact, That Immediately upon his accession he had
grown gray. His day labors and his night watches
had maze him gray old man aud his
present sad and emaciated appearance really
proved his professions. (L.augher) Counsel then
referred to the depreciation oI the Erie Railroad
STOCK, and the scandals connected VITA it under the
management OF FISK and Gould. The management
was byword OF reproach, not only In the city, but
IN every mart wneie stocks were sold. II their con-
duct were as Mr.. Fisk protessed. why were the
books which showed thar conduct kept backS Tne
Court had announced that th Is action could only be
maintained on proof OF frald. What the proofs
OF the iraudr the charge was that The defendant
maintained suits to recover losses OF his STOCK
market That loss occurred through his effort 10
MANI ain the price OF the STOCK and the throwing Of
mass OF fraudulent anu spurious stock, through Mr.
FISK, on the market 70 depress II. Was 1t fraud
10 compel them TO take back and cancel the spurl-
GUS stocKp suppose he did control these sults-was
there anything to prevent his using any lnstru-
mentality to protect himself or compel The Erie
road 10 raise the money fraadulentiy taken by II
from his pocketSf Assuming the claim OF Mr.. Van :
derbilt TO be well founded anything winch no might
DO TO MAINTAIN 1t against the pronigate manage
lnent OF this company was justified. But In any
case the settlement was made with the iull knowl-
eoge OF all the directors Even Mr.. Fisk became a
partner and associate Of the robbers and plunder-
ers. Could it be said there was any fraudS Not
only Mr. Schell charged with fraud, but thcllOn