New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-07-05

9o8s4toue4sv& oQotolH war;
ANs4ESfk dispatch o. the twenty -nintll
to the Louisville Gcswicr.Jom1al, says:
Thewar which has been raging for some
time between Fisk and Gould on one side and
the Vanderbilt interest on the other, mani
testing itself in competition between thu
great Routes to the West controlled by these
men, has at last also taken the form Of con
trevetwy in the courts, and the suit brought
some days since by the Erie Railway Com
pany against the. Lake Shore, Michigan
southern Railroad Company, the New
York Central and Hudson River Railroad
Company, claiming three million dollars and
an injunction, was before Judge Barnard
yesterday, on a motion to show cause why
the injunction should not be granted. The
complaint details the manner in which, by
the laws Of this and Other States, the com m
panies in litigation were originally char
tered, and at different times thereafter con.
solidated. 1t goes on torecite the interest in
vOlved ia such consolidation, especially why
In April, 1851, an agreement was, entered
into between the Erie and the Buffalo State
Line, the Dunkirk and State Line and the
Buffalo and Rochester Railroad Companies.
1t shows how the Erie Company Mt the re-
quest Of all the various corporations since
consolidated into the Lake Shore and Michi-
gan Southern Company, consented to con.
meet with the Buffalo and State line at Buff
falO, instead of Dunkirk. How the Lake
Shore and Michigan Southern now acts and
has for long time past acted entirely in the
interest of the New York Central and Hud-
son River Companies, and has in many in
stances violated the contract made with the
Erie. How the Buffalo and State Line Com
pany altered the gauge of their line to suit
the Central, while the Lake Shore and
Michigan Southern maintained its rolling
OF 1,s,: %r,c A.
Central i'll preference to the Erie.
How the agents of the Lake Shore and
Michigan Southern have used. their influ-
ence IN soliciting custom to the Central and
Hudson river, to the prejudice of the plain
TINS, and have so arranged the arrival of
trains at Buffalo as to almost compel pas
sengers to come on East by the Central.
How, while pretending to take freight from
the Central at the. same rates as from the
Erie, they, in fact, reduce such rates in IA
vor Of the Central by drawbacks, rebates
and allowances. How the managers. of the
Lake Shore and Southern refuse to run any
trains into the Lake Shore and Michigan
depot at Buffalo, though that depot and the
depots OF all the defendants are doose to-
gether, and they will run trains regularly
into the depot Of the Central
How this causes an immense amount of
freight and passenger traffic to be diverted
from the line of the Erie to those of its
rivals, the other defendant thereby depriv-
ing the plaintiff Of profits to the amount of
more than three millions of dollars, and the
complaint concludes with the statement
that it would be impossible to calculate in
detail the hpshot Of the damage incurred
and still mourning through these wrongful
acts, and that all the defendants are practi
cally leagued together and acting in concert
to run their lines in opposition to the Erie,
the president of one line being the son of
the other, and each VIGOROUSLY playing into
the others hands.
The relief sought for is Judgment for
three millions of dollars and an injunction
restraining the Lake Shore Company from
moving any of its rolling stock ON the line
or into the depot of the Central or Hudson
River, and an Injunction on the mainten-
ance of any railroad between the city Of
Buffalo and the boundary line of the State
of Pennsylvania. The court is additionally
asked to order the Lake Shore and Michi-
gan Southern to conform the gauge of the
line to the four feet ten inches required by
the contract, to abstain from selling tickets
or conveying freights to any point east Of
Buffalo, and to otherwise act fairly and on
strictly equal terms as with and between
the plaintiff and the other defendant.
The defendants wanted sixty days time
to prepare their papers. They allege that
the injunction will compel four hundred
thousand passengers annually to change
cars at Buffalo in the night time. compel
a change at Buffalo of about ten million tons
OF property from one car to another every
year; that it will compel another change OF
all these passengers and of all their property
at the line of the State of PENNSYLVANIA.
and that the changes will involve delay in
the transportation of passengers and prop
erty, and an expense to the public, much
greater than all damages that the plaintiff
may sustain. and will give no benefit to the
plaintiff SO long as it insists upon using an
exceptional gauge for its road, and refuses
to adopt the common gauge of the country,
but will insure the benefit of the Pennsyl-
vania and Baltimore and Ohio roads. Judge
Barnard said he would grant the postpone
ment, but that meantime the matter must
go before a referee to take testimony, and n
partial injunction must be granted.