New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-03-20
THE COURTS.
ERIE LITIGATION.
AGAINST TIE UNION PACIFIC-fEn
JURISDICTION IN TIE CASE.


AGAINST the Union Pacific Railroad Company came up On
motion 70 akc nom the records biz in equity and
declaration 90 common law led in that Court since the
transfer O. tls case e rou the Superior Court OF tho
state IT, arguing This motion, Mr. EmO.t Of counsel for
defendants sd that The suit In the state Court was an
equitable suit and asked that the plaintiff be declared
the hOdc Of 5000 shares Of the stock Of the Union Pa
ciac Railroad It was finally transferred TO the United
TIE Act Of & declares that copies Of al papers plead
iugs. .,s ous, end tcs tmouy may he entered m to-
Court and tar tho .i. proceed upOn them m this
Court as if brought upon Inc original papers. Under
pcatiOr may be made Gd the St rouoN ga RI any uMe
yieds 1a, h. used In this Court With the same effect
the on -u.s. Tie A.t ~ is iGStO cuahlc portion
out otl ar- who hl rot greed tho bringing Of the
suit Tho point that both those ST. futcS N The night
70 remove tine SUIT ar tuy SidEt ,.Ie pFo.eed.,- ot
il must come IN the shape Ia which We, brought a the
Court below Iie meaning oi the &C. s th3t tht tsse
I'm IN the State Corr The only point necessary 10 make
as present is that this is the SUI. which Mas removed
ana with an the i'm. ilerta attached TO IT,
Tic suit ir this Is inst a enc parties named ~
Tie h ln equity, with tc single exception OF person
named Davis 10 vas 4ot Party 20 l,f sun Nm rt to-
party .Huc after The removal OF tlc SUIT nc rs ;
IN equity with Davis out Q, IT, is tie legitimate ol,id o.
The STATE Court, and anything else Is baS'iu "a M
relief The 0ut has assumed definite, O.ni4 S4'ic, ~
is on the equity side with an irirneion ID ~ tS,ore
he changed, and u must 20 on as 4 penn ~ III L. ,
GpGn iAf ~, o''s, , Pa mis- court. Re must e
bin and GoJ sUbpe mas 70 c.th Oi t0 ne .ia
relief he corr"t he allowed to create a new branch
Of this litigation on an acton lor 'lu'hV' ,.' ft,
brought, claiming - $4,000 against mos M l,i
they should have issued 10 hiu IheIols an H'onP''
nj fv ice yrfp these two actions.
ne "Srtidn 70 the blu is that by Davis cannot be
party 90 The suG he can be nAde a par Uu.a
by supplemental proceedings lie was as ReyST ity ta
with the papers mt. after tEe paes were Gu -
pet,t Tor The stare Co2t 70 60 a. 5 yis d tf tbHr
is power the state Court after that TO change the
David Dcdlry field opposed the motion, and read an
afIayit Of John ". SteT the effect that James W.
80 80 tS N, ION ~ me STElt Nio,iiier was made
u remove the st thc L. Circuit Court He said
the position 10y the defense is that the moment
one ic.eut. nj out Of s. petitions 10 remove tie
- g. ,-t,o 80 yi,st stdy, rerouse thpy cannot he
served wi the papers in the state C1al, and they cav
not he served mere In such case the Court viii! have
NO .r ION This rs denial Of al justice, and il Is
wa, brought against 81 defendants. SIX Of them az
poarc tha state Court and the others nave 1oV bc,
served. Eve Of the pcuG.ncd 10 remove the cause
into his Court. az it was so removed. The question
was debated IN the state Court whether il was proper
removal and, ii removed at AL wren Ihe ptl.ioH We
iied Nj Tracy made affidavit that the petition was
ted ON tie lO OF March, lsc9 and one said IL WAS
in Au gust. should DC Leid that the cas-, ana Lt con-.
here 70 te other cefend4nts GHtI thfy appu{G ne
cannot prosecute DAVE without TIE Ohcf ptIu-s' De-
cause he can torn round and y tAd- Ue SUI - no,
az INST him 1As plant 81 nc t' .,, i - 800,
cover legal of action. j, was Ieu Oh ,hS tucoy
Court tElttu 70 FCiicit ''lul''s-
whether i be one or the other.
The hscrutOn " 5000 shares remains on The books
~ the Company 70 this day. Du1 ~ lhe adNlct u eosi
tie Treasurer .fused TO receive the money,
On So TIE , e2nnd Di5 e ' o fyH. Es h
II the plaintiff is stakeholder lie l. entitled
the Court will hat nc mas legal right to sue Tor
damages. Congress cannot take away a mans Iesh
ascertain what DIS legal rights are.
samuel j. IT, den referred % Ju3 &c Nelson's opinion,
.f.H % Tn| 20 .-f u HIfHl 4. r.
moved from Tie STATE 10 the Federal Court, and tid mat
opinion was gtd tt: tA- sHil Ill ai itS tIulelg ana
jurisdict at iWe stated whether the
party pettored ur not Judge Nelson said that # there
outside parties who were deemed material IN the
matter they must be regarded as subordinate TO the
principal litigation. Decision reserved. 8
ERIE AND THE ENGLISH STOCIuIoLDERs-A Be
WILDERED RECEIVER.
Kenneth G. White, the newly appointed Mas
ter in Equity ia the case OF James Fisk ir the Eric Rail
road Company and j. d White, against Heath Raphael
and others lately issued order commencing James H.
Coleman, the receiver appointed by Judge Barnard il
this case 10 appear before him today and transfer 10
Heath ana Raphael the COOo5 shares OF Ee 5toC1 10"
withhold irUIH them. Coleman then OBTAIN cd rom ud9
B.atchford at Chambers an g. pdfc order slayus &il
proceedings by him In the matter Of transferring ihe
stock until ne should be further instructed IN regard 10
Court Saturday Judge E,a;chiCrd heard the arsu-
ueuts upon tins oItcf CaIeHce a, ae"3tu %a S ti
In question subject to the order Of the Court for tie
5 6.}e oicrs and that he could not safely transfer
drected Without acquaintns this Court and the
STATE Court his present position; lie :lereiore as4ed
tbe Court 10 Ilct him what DO, he believed that
be was still bound, certain extent, by the order OF
the State Cont appomti1g INN rectl or. ,,,,
Nj SoutnneyU Of counsel for Heath ana R2plaeI re-
viewed the prior proceedings IN The Caaa ana SAID:
This Ia petition ~ inc rece NeF ot lis IRON
the Court 90 what he should do IL respect Of te DE-
manG made upon him by Charles Robinson to GcHNer
aver b him the coos shares OF stock belonging 70 heath
ask Tie Court 20 instruct Mr. Coleman that his sole uuty
Is obey the ORDER MADE on last SATURDAY ana WEog
so disregard The cOne uuE claims OI CEarcs hObs0u
70 this sock, defiance OF the order OF me QUIT an
order made on fhe 81 q MaI-' loi' by JulSe A4l
ward, appointing hoDlson recels-i VI liis T t
suit prosecuted n the state Court Us james ISM ~ Dut
Mr. FISK appears 80 have obtained ne" IceeI' "
this stock. A. anul ttic- ol u-i.-'. "-lCI I" 100
mere directing the restoration or TO c part cs 10 WAO
ID belonged ut Jays before this motion heard, ana
une word was sii 81 As ofoer or proteeuiS 10 any
ms proceeding o. M. FISK is gross contempt Of Court,
Tor Wlch le should be Adequately punished. lie then
argued tina, The strict ADHERENCE to the orders OF the
not ondauge- in any deg1ce ls sIeties, but that
would De proper execution a u!s guy! ~ an 1lc-r Ol
+-,e, 10 tbn General administration the affairs Of
- ne p i,ad he seid taa tie object sought - bc ac-
.0lrp>lcd a cerct ion at those outraSes ana DIS
graceful acts have before i, ana 70 peTpetuate
I'm a fpHn5i,m. The Company j. presided over by
.hcn l0r registration was an Unparalleled outrage
II such acts ere o. continue ne OF JsIte
In tiis country WILDE burlesqoe For ms elarng rob
Ue-y the con- lDy openly passed ne oHJoh o. eoAIdfhce
en- FISK and liou0, ana u D. now lui uc ihat an hol
"a tribunal intercept he continuance OF these disgrace
f acts u is lnGisputane uat me tohtSt "l t.I "
rccCrs OF tlis road tends more 10 desioy te eject
l,Deieau securities u europe than ought else BESIDE
and o wcIuor;cd check 10 'Ae Sa.p o. these spoilers
,r h. he hest means To its restoration" Adj
,o-rred 10 next Saturday.
suit brought In the state Courts az effort was
made IN, saturday for a hearing before Judge tudozo
49, Am appC ttor OF the receiver 10 what lslOslt On
e anon make ~ the stock JUICE CARGO" detincd 10
Esy anything 10 do in the matter until Judge BiaIcAiOrd
lad rendered ais decision IN the nai'eI'
THE JUMEL ESTATE
II the JUmel VIII case, before the referee,
an saturday Mrs.. Catherine Eddy, daughter Of Mrs
freeman colored witness previously examined testl-
III Inn. Iumna nnlsr. she