New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-04-15
THE COU RTa.
ElSnth Dlslrict Court.


poned until Thursday. the twenty-sixth in
slant.
In the case of the Chattanooga Railroad
against the city, Mr.. Reckwith moved to
dissolve the injunction for reasons filed.
the Gre At JscksOn Railroad Case.
Henry s. McComb VS.. the Jackson Rail
road Company. City OF New Orleans and
Others. Intervenors-The examination OF
witnesses in this case was resumed yester-
day before Judge Dlbbe, of the Eighth Dis
trict Court, sitting in the Fifth District
Court room.
City Attorney Beckwith was the first wit
ness, and testified to the evident lndispOs-
ton on the part of Mr.. Mount, as he under
stood him, to communicate Ais intentions
with regard to the sale Of the eighty thou
sand shares owned by the city in The Jackson
Railroad Company.
Judge Campbell said he proposed to prove
that there was a conspiracy on the part OF
McComb to force the sale of the stock of the
city; that Shields signature to the ordinance
was purchased, and that Mount. the City
Treasurer, was seduced from bis duty to go
into the country to avoid an opportunity OF
consultation with him, or knowledge of his
intentions, and that at one O'Clock the day
of the sale the agents Of McComb went to
Mounts house to urge him to make de-
cision, and carried him to the bank, their
rendezvous, where the matter was finally
consummated; that MoComb gave as
reason for his going to the bank. that his
agreement specified that place as
the one where an answer was to be
received, but the document shows on
it's face no sucn understanding; that the
City Treasurer was, as it were, carried into
the country and kept there so as to prevent
access with parties disposed to bid tor the
stock; that Hoyle had lulled these parties
into security by withdrawing his Injunction
at an inopportune moment, and that 1t
would be competent to show that there was
fraud in the actions Of tie parties con-
ceTned.
MIR. Billings Contended that Mr.. Hoyle
had proceeded as mera private citizen,
and his motives were Lot IL question IN this
case.
Judge Dibbie said the only question was
| as TO whether Nj. Hoyie WAS liable to indict-
mem. aud this the courts had determined
| by deciding that bribery was not statutory
oifeuse.
Judge Campbell admitted that there was
40 statute Furnishing bribery. SO the in
curry as to Hoyles motives was dropped
| FOR the present. but Judge Campbell said he
! would hereafter show that the exception
did not apply to municipal corporations.
The examination of Mr.. Beck with was re-
sumed. He had been unable to find out the
| existence of MeConb's bond, but there
| seemed to be a universal disposition at the
City Hall to withhold all information from
| him. He had letter from Mr. McComb to
Nj Kimbail, which had been left at his
| Office without his knowledge. 1t was IN his
| Office and would be produced in evidence.
| He had made every effort that he thought
would be successful to fGd out the existence
| Of McComb's bond, of which he had heard,
so as to stop the transfer Of the certificates
| of the CITY stock to him, soon as he found
| out sent letter on the subject to
| Mr.. Summers, president of the Crescent
| City Bank. This letter has been published,
and is familiar to the public.l
Mr.. Guvol was the next witness. His tee
| timony elected no new fact Of interest.
The name of Mr.. Schneider was called as
! the next witness. Being absent, Judge
| Campbell said he proposed to prove by him
| that, sc a member Of the firm of ForstRii &
| Brothers, in this city, he was authorized by
| q telegram to bid $500 600 for q firm in New
York. Mr.. Schreiber was sent for, and the
| court took recess.
next examined. On the day of the sale
| went TO the City Treasurers Office; saw
| Assistant Treasurer CONWAY; asked If he
| knew whether the Mayor had signed the Or
| dinance to sell the city stock; he referred to
! the Bulletin, IN which the ordinance was
passed; lie inquired of Mayor Conway about
! 1t, and again of the Assistant City Treasurer,
| t.LU lucu VI Ue6GItl DotuIcShiu, WIZ
| showed him letters OF Mr. Mount that bids
would be received till one o'clock; went to
| see Mr.. BeckWlth, expecting to get some
| positive Information from him; went back to
| see if the Assistant City Treasurer could
| receive bids. Ee said not, and finally told
| him Mount was sick and probably would
| not again be III the Office. l ther left a let
ter, OF which the following is copy, with
| the Assistant c ity Treasurer:
| April 2, 1870.
| W. s. Mount, Esq. City Treasurer:
sIR-In behalf of responsible parties who
| desire TO purchase the stock of the city in
the jackson Railroad. l would request from
you delay Of the sale for at least forty
| eight hours, Or as much longer as yOu may
| choose to wait, to enable them to put in
proposals. l have peen looking for you in
| vain since 80 2. NJ. to-day, and your assis-
tant informs me he has no authority to act
| or even to receive bids.
". W. HOWE.
Witness was asked What was understood
| by the highest bids, but the question was
| Withdrawn.
| Mr.. Thomas Burke testified that he took
| the letter of Mr.. Beckwith to Mir. Summers,
| and that the latter replied that the City A.
| tOrney muat proceed Ia the courts.
| Mr. SChreiber testified that he was mem-
| ber of the firm of Forstall Brothers & Sons
| that the senior of the firm had been IN buSl-
ness about fifty years; that they were agents
| for j. II. Schroeder & Co., a firm of like
| standing with the RotLchllds and Barring
| Brothers, etc.
| He presented the telegram in reference 70
the proposed bid. 1t is in sypher. and the
| KEY to interpret it was sent for. The firm
/ received other kilograms same day. Before
I receiving them We had determined not to
I bid for our friends, as the proceedings look
| ing to the sale of the stock were 50 irregu-
| lar, and we did not care to involve them IN
! litigation.
There was considerable argument and dis.
| play of learning by counsel. as to whether
| the key to this cypher could be legally re
| Quired. General Freeman cited IN the
Negative the New York case of r. g. Dun
! Judge Diob,e held that the rules concern
| ing experts were applicable, and that eX-
perts could not be required 10 produce their
| means of Information. The te!egrams were
| offered n evidence and interpreted by wit
ness.
| The first telegram from New York author
| ized bid OF four dollars per share tor city
and State stock; and another, same day,
| through Mr.. Tinker for the London firm,
| fixing as uitlmatum OF the bid four dollars
! and twenty-five cents per share.
| A letter from Mr. Mount TO silr. unber'
major was read, in which Mr.. Mount re
quested the railroad company to present
| any bid they had to make by one O'Clock. 1t
! does not state that the bids would then
! Ci0se.-REPoRTERl.
| Mr.. Writ Adams wac corresponding with
! witness commercial house III Europe and
was not representing the Jackson Raii-
! road.
| The witness was asked the question put
! to Judge Howe. What was understood in
commercial circles by the words sci