The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1870-12-23
TEE Ell; RAILROAD ApcAuA.
Strongly Contested Legal Effort 10 Get 4
Glimpse at the Books and Papsr, (
OF tic Erie Railroad. -'ovl;

Our court cycles with unfailing regularity con.
tinue TO bring forward IN bold relief one and another
OF the interminable Erie Railway SUITS with all those
Kaleidoscope changes giving them such memorable
renOwn. Yesterday, before Judge Brady, of the SUI
preme Court came up the case designated In thA
calendar In the peculiar idiomatic Of the courts "A
1.-THE People, ex rel. Franklin H. Churchill, vs. The
Erie Railway Company ct al" There was o large
attendance as there always is at these legal ourna-
ments, but made up mainly. OF course, OF lawyers
THE PRELIMINARY FACTS.
The plaintf is a stockh0ldcr in the Erie Railway
Company. In October last he applied to the Presi.
dent and Secretary OF the road for permission to
examine the books OF the company, such application
being made pursuant to statutory provisions allows
Ing stockholders to examine the books Of corporas
tons within thirty days prior to the election OF
directors. Permission TO make this examination
being refused application as will be RENE mDereds
was made to Judge Barnard for an alternative man.
damus, which was argued at length and denieds
The defendants demurred to these proceedings and
insisted that the case should be placed on tho
special term calendar and taken up when reached
in It's regular turn. THIS latter was accord
ingly taken and the case was reached yesterday.
A CONTEST AGAINST LEGAL QUiBBLEs.
Mr.. Charles II. SCuthmayd made the opening
speech in opposition TO the demurrer. He claimed
tnat the opposition to allowing examination Of the
books and papers Of the company was wholly baged
on the meres technical grounds, and that its sole
purpose had been 10 stay decision IN the case until
the desired examination wOuld be made, 100 late "a
accomplish the purposes sought by the plaintiff. na
referred to the good old times when suc Legal qub
bes not the basis OF legal argument and action
and desire for Justice sole and supreme controlled
both the BAR ana the bench.
A FIRM sTAND ON ELEMENTARY PRINCIPLES.
Sir. David Dudley Field went into discussion Of
which he claimed had been utterly overlooked by
the other Side He Claimed THAT the plaintiffs were
applied to the proper author ties for permission ID
were not stated Which eSe Mda e
books; that the re.urn was complete and valid aff
swer 20 the writ; that SIR. Jay Gould was ony one 81
be directed to the officers having charge OF the
books, and not to the corporation. he citcd M,
to which the previous counsel had Referred 10 sui,
siantlate his argument.
THE GOLDEN LEGAL AGE.
'Will you be good enough, Mr.. Field,o the Jud RI
smilingy asked him while in the midst OF this part
Of has argument ITO define the dividing line be-
tween the good OH times and the present evil days
as touching lew decisionsf" n
CHATS A plErrY HARD j
matter" answered Mr.. Field, o bright, pleasing
smile lighting UP his bland features. asoine would
regard al the good old times when boy was hung
in in, EagIana for stealing two eggs For himself hs
yet In the administration OF justice' 4
eGEKfsG INFORMATION FROM LoNe-EARED SOURCES.
"AS TO Mr. Could refusing permission TO eAamina
the BOOKS" said the Judge IN aaother part Of inS
arguments "who should the application have beer
ITO the governing body" answered Mr.. Fields.
''Tne directors 2"
"Certa.nly."
"s5iit suppose there was to be no meeting OF the
directors IN thirty days, what then?'
"lnc statutes provide for the emergency"
"lhe statutes rs he interprets them" inter.
rupted Mr. SoutDmayd, ''would keep us going rom
Que man with his head behind his long ears TO am
other Gd minimum, and the result Is we would
never see the books OF ALL, Y
This allusion TO the aufal appendagcs of the Erie
Railroad managers eXctea general laugh alter
which Mr. Field wont on with his argument without
further interruption. In conclusion he insisted THAI
the responsibility or the delay belonged wholly I'd
the plaintiffs, and not to the defendants.
CLOSING SPEECH AND TAXING THE PAPEEs.
MI. Souihmaya ietoined III lengthy Argument.
He urged that there was an affirmative Oblgati0i
resting upon the railroad company 10 keep their
books open for the inspection " stockholders. He
denied the applicability 10 the present case OF shs
English authorities cited by the opposing s.de and,
IN conclusion, argued that on applying Tor permits.
sion 10 make the examination they were not bound
10 state its object
The Court took the papers and reserved its decls