New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-01-30

n; repuation IL unprotected aud the other that WhHt
should he the Wholesome restraint Of the press hOl ua
men ia Iost because there ia so little discrimination PC
tween the bad aud the good All are hSsaeu "iN' ~
ANONYMOUS and irresponsible accu-eis 90 IT,. ,,,dor
m 1 wjsh there had been spoc lcatlons nnder
the general expression, about the sfadii hllu ~
against all public aud private morality IA nc ahI ~ ~
The law courts" ~ the robbery Is meant, suppose,
t. The taking and holding Of the Offices Of directors Of
the Erie Railway Company; or, -
p The taking and holding by the directors Oh 'e ProP
erty OF the Company or ~,
g. The failure OF the directors to render an account OF
their transactions beyond the annual reports, foqnrtn
by law. II anything else Is meant, nope u VIII dc
viii re fer 10 these three in their order:
l. The taking and holding OF their Offices by the on,
rcctOrs have little concern with As you or l"f
Bosthwck himself never attended an election. |
never gave my assistance the procuring Ot NOc or
proxies and was never consulted on tie subject Al me
lime OF the election in October 1867, in Europe
that election which brought Mcssra. E,dridge, Could
and Fisk into the Board Neither hat eleclon nVI "S
SUBSEQUENT one has been disputed, far a. know.
and therefore cannot see with what proprlcty can
be a1id that the present directors hold ther OeA ny
aid of the law courts" or by any aid or act 0 mine Inc
act passed by our Legislature In 1862 providing for tue
classification OF directors IN the Tour great ra' p %
poratnn--the New York Central, the Hudson RIVER lhe
Harem and the ErieI did not suggest, advise, adt
cate or by any assist In procuring vi HS pony
I have n1thng To say, except that the principle OF
classification is taken from English precedent But go
further and profess myself in favor Of ana reay 20 r9
annlv fine nrinche Of proportional representation to al
corporate bodies My opinions to that effect were Freely
cytircssed duriuV the last session, and will be
1870 i,ri,,t he nrcScnt Tins If the stock OF q cor
pnron were divided into 10000 shares, and there
Is directors to be chosen would give one director 10
q The present directors of the Company having an IN
disputed certificate Of election and being in possession
oi rho ofices hold the property OF the Company Of
course but the directors can hold ~ unless re-
ceiycr be appointed and no application for such appoint
ment is now pending or has been made since lSJs
g. As 10 the failure Of the directors 10 Ithu'r an W.
count -Four tigatiOns have been ser on i'Ot asaiist
them two in lSG8 in 1859, and one IN 1870 Inc as
the only brought In good iaith, a. uniDI7Ianu
the and the law of the cases Inc hrst Two weS
.lfI
English precedent, appeared against Their being SUE
turned out Of by any judge before whom comGs
This mali by his avOw3l, bought zen sn'ts OF tie
nrefrred stock three shares OF common stock two ser
ling bonds and four other bonds orthc purpose of nLins
lion anywhere Tie fourth suit, that OF the English
sharehoidcrs was brought in the Circuit Court OF
the United States in ApIil OF last year. VI an NV
IN 5S "'g viii gS eTyc neither to
the right to the left II will yield nothing 20 Saloi
viii move il an inch The suit is now going regularly
demurrer, for what we think suihcieht Ieos"n.' ~
been flied 10y the three counsel of the Company Mr. b.
r. Curtis Mr. f.. W. Stoughton. and myself. We are
ready for the argument and hope IL may pe 49,
t,,rI1g the present month Let me ask Lord Bo-th-
wick II in all this there bc anyt ing on my part worthy
20 further and nFlte an IeasOSp 10 o
without disclosing my clients case, shall be HAPPY 10
any inquiries which ne 1i any o'lcd a,'rv on
nortIity 10 Justify myself my English irends %h9ie
good opinion value much Perhaps HHIt!i a, ~ no.
am not the standing counsel OF the Erie hi,l"
r"innany or of any OF its managers. whenever
act for them it Is upon special retainer ana
should also perhaps, take some notice OF me 1ILle
I'm Tbs westminster Tor October. But il l. enough FOR me
To- saw here that had no more to do with the goi1 con,
spracv than the Governor Of the Bank ~ EnYau anu
that all did aferward IN respect to the conr3N eises
growing out U it was TO give n{ opinion thst ne GI b
and stock Exchanges had not the authority 10 AFTER me
term. OF contracts ana that an attempt on thelr part ~
enforce their will by means oI arbitration ana
might ryhtly he restrained by iiUunC Ou-ah Oplnlo
which I -tlll hold and ready 10 JUSTIFY, as nav.
already DONE by argument In the courts But iorggt
tina. you charged in the same iboous article WIN
having sat ~ one Of the c0nspiratoS, at supper prsu
b pffsidgu, To such lrng! will hate aud lalseho0d
hear An uscrupnOus wretch willing 20 falslfy ana low
40 DAVID DUDLEY FIELD
Five other letters written since the above were given
to the public have been sent by Mr. Field They re-
late chiefly to the circumstances OF the publication OF the
two pamphlets and the for excluding portions of
the correspondence from that printed by ar Field Mt
Bowles writes on the 2lst;
should hope Of course that you are wrong IN claim
ing all the respectable lawyer JUDGES on yo Se
in lids controversy. Many, very naturally ifon ploie
sOna association and Sympat, ~ well i' rom tE iu-
ing the matter in purely scientific or q, nnga lSnt
shall have been deceived II the Judgment OF bench ana
Gr In Nassachusett is not very strongly against you.
Certainly, you must have reason TO suppose WIN
me- that eminent Judge OF your own state !Judse
Rnsecr;,ns of the supreme COur would LOOK AZ these
matters somewhat a. do; and anu even doubtful anu
curious what bar association Oh Nt" 1otk
CIV Woud say up6n the issue made up In discus
sion However the profession. here there, might now
divide on. decide question: which, inlt~ DsracIlos
thew have always divided upon and never DE-
cilSd feel no hesitation In anticipating tie
moral Judgment nf the great body Of honest and nteli
geAt citizens favor OF the opinions have expressed
And such Of either class professional or ay rs 20 over
dependence TO revise al Uid or MAKE mp res
Judgment the subject will be more likely 10 be deter
mined against you by confession OF your own IN your
Of the l2th than by anT argument or illustration q"
mine. For while your son, with your approval, had
been arguing that these notorious clients, with cor
rpt causes but the incidents OF your profes-
sona life that You shared their patronage larry Win
her eminent lawyers, and they NOur time ana ablhy
with other clients aud causes you IN That mote, EoiHi
practice against your wishes and purposes for the last
live years solely in order 10 he the attorney OF MI Jam
Fisk, IT,, and his aIsocates am sur ho'hlhg nav
said ia all these letters will he more damaging to your
cause and cilraccr than this surprising declaration of
your own. am, yours trny, SAMUEL bo"LhS'
MR.. FIELD To MR.. BowLEs
NEw-YoRK, Jan. q, 1871.
Nothing could be more
unfortunate your argument or illustration han your
references to the "cDinrnt judge Roseclans The case
before him had nothing 70 do with whatever. hnew
nothing of he suit, beyond the fact at there wac one
such in existence; but the conduct OF IL was ehrey III
the hands of one of my partners ana other cOuhse,
Your comment bn my expressions about seeking 10 re-
tire from active practice Is snguary confused ana I'M
fair even for you. Because said that mad been IOf
years seeking TO retire from active IaetlGe anu H
nothing but profound conviction that could not with
honor retire from those suits has kept me IN te you
Jump tO tho conclusion that nave fenaeu ia Practce
against my wishes and purposes for the last I'VE years
solely order to be- the attorney or Mr James flsS IT,
and his associates" DO you really think TINS ir state
ment Of what wrote Did y0u Actually understand me az
using words n them that ia III the suits against the
Erie Railway Company and its managers, IN Whcn am
acting for the defendants in tho SAINT she words
Sin praetice You did, must confess myself unable
70 with YOU You do not appear TO know the differ
ence between attorney and counsel or between active
practice aDd attendance at Chambers, with occasional
apuearauce in Court. The first Erie Railway litigation
hrgan in the Spring OF 1863 when was engaged in the
McArdle case at Washington the second began IN TIE
hutnmn of 1868 when engaged In defending Gen.
Drar a. Washiugton Both these ended long ago.
The third that of Ramsey, be in the Autumn OF ls6E
IN. fourth that of the English shareholders in me spring
81 ls7o II knew which Of these you considered the
worst and what proceedings in them you Thought very
had would endeavOr to show you what did, and the
rf,fohfr nod ma h
confused notion the litigation, and could not, snI
nose tell very well what you would complain or SO let
ii pass. Your obedicnt servant
~ P'' DAVID DUDLEY FIELD
MR. BowLEs TO Mr.. FIELD.
TIE REPUBLICAN, SPRINGFIELD, Mass, JAM 20, ISL
have not am well aware, gone into the