The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1870-12-06

recollection OF any order OF receiver having Deen
gwen 10 me; those papers are now IN the pigeon
holes OF my desk; between the 24th and the 18th
had consulted with no one upon the suit ana had
not moved q step; | advised Mr. Stopford 20 COM
mence u suit against the company; heard that Mr..
Stopf0rd commenced the suit.
| Mr.. Fed-Dd he commence thai suit on nine
I shares OF preferred stock you bought for him
| Mi. Tracy objected. Objection oyerruied.
that sut; bought some STOCK OF the company for
| the purpose OF suing the company; Stopford sold
the slocA TO me; bought II az the same price,
| splred between Mr. St0pf0rd and Mr.. Eaton; fur
nishe the money to buy the stock: knew that Mr..
Eaton was lltigaiiDg that question.
| 10 Mr. Cadwallader-The question wished TO
test whether the preferred stock should pay In
teresl or dividends Mr.. Eaton had no connection
with me IN the matter; appeared for the company
In 1889 In foreclosure suit the morning OF the
Gath OF November, about ten O'Clock, Mr.. Eaton
brought against the Erie Railroad Company
and certain directors TO suspend them; thar the
papers mad been served on Mr.. Dibbln and that Mr.
DlbDin mad asked me TO appear for the company;
that was TO take no steps until heard from Mr..
Diboin, as there would be PROBABLY meeting OF Tho
non suspending directors whs would take some &C
ton and let him know; then served nv appear.
ance Mr.. Eaton came In again on the Goth, and SAID
Mr.. Dibpn had altered his mind and revoked The
10 Mr.. Field never did anything for the railway
company except In connection with Mr. Eaton.
JOSEPH w. sTOPFoRD's TESTIMONY.
Joseph W. StopfOrd-l brought suit against the
Erie Railroad Company; FIRST mad IA interview
some shares Of preferred stock for the pur-
pose OF bringing a test snls he paid for
~: S'0' then ANU went to 's Mr. Eaten At
Mr.. RuDkies request Mr.. Eaton said that number
OF parties were Interested the case, and the pro-
bablity was that the expenses would be twenty-five
cents share; gave the STOCK back 10 Nj. Rnnkle,
who took II at the same price he gave for IL; re-
ceived the stock In Nav, 1869, and gave pack In
November or December; there was about one hun
dred dollars difference In the valne of IT,
TO MI. Smith-The object OF the suit was to test
the question whether the stoc xholders should be
pale their dividends; was selected, suppose, be-
cause was friend OF Mr.. Runkle; 1 was engaged
AZ CLERK In the Tenth National Bank, and withdrew
my SUIT after Fisk and Gould had become POSSESSED
or a controlling influence In the bank; had u con.
versation with Gesd. who wished me to employ
hun as my agent 70 continue the suit; Withdrew
the suit about q week afterwards.
To Mr. eld-Mr. Runkle and Eaton said should
receive OF the profits realized from the suit.
A SCENE BETWEEN COUNSEL.
Here an amusing discussion took place between
laughter Mr. Smith insisted that the latter had
asked certain question.
Mr.. Field replied didn't.
Mr.. Smith-iou did. Wont you believe me when
i speak the TRUTH
Mr.. Fied-It is so seldom that you do.
Mr.. Smith-Ysu cannot recognize the truth when
witness-when Mr.. Eaton first spoke'to me about
the suit citizen, that could bring suit in
the State Court, but afterwards removed to New
Jersey.
MIR. Feld-Now propose to read the deposition
OF Ramsey and GrOsbeck taken In the suit OF Ram
sey against the Erie Railroad Company.
Mr. Smith objected TO their admission, on the
STOuuu LuAL hdHScy was cOmpetcnL 10 LeStlIy nlIn-
SELF 1t was not a deposition, nor had any deposit
uen OF Ramsey been taken in The case. Counsel
oannst resort to testimony taken 10 another cause
and put 1t in bodily here.
Judge Barnard-Mr. Field has right TO put such
portions IN that bear on the case.
The amdavit OF Joseph II. Ramsey and also that OF
MI. Eaton was afterwards fully read by consent Of
all parties.
THE CLOSE
Judge Barnard expressed his opinion that upon
the testimony he should have 10 dismiss the com
plant against Ramsey. As Isr a. the testimony
went be was disposed to say that Eaten, Taller,
Grosbeck and Runkle have rendered themselves lia-
bic TO have their action reviewed by the court but
30 far o. Ramsey was concerned, at present he was
not able to see cOnsEi tracy on his part
Mr.. Tremane then moved Tor discharge Of the
complaint against Ramsey.
Judge Porter made q similar motion on behalf OF
Grssbeck, and Mr. Oadwalader also claimed the dis
missal OF the complaint against Taller and Eaton.
Judge Barnard, after hearing tho arguments
offered, granted the motions in the case OF Ramsey
and Taller to DISMISS holding his decision as to
Grosbeck till tins morning. As TO Eaton, he would
reserve his opinion TIL future day.