New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-03-13
MIR. FIELD ANSWERS
a. pdt,or Of TAc Trtbune.

rosterlaN's TRIBUNE, OF your AV''NA w nv f-N -
,,orlv IN the attack Of your correspondents
Y 49,. ,o,uinns in which he has assailed me orc
,,,od nm lay you In an editorial containing eight
cborres which must assume to lie fair and sufficient
,n,n,ar- and which. being IN form convenient 10 a-
swer sin answer one by one.
Wi, saw hy way OF introduction. that far ~ any Oh
them res! upon The opinion OF Judge Darwin Smith, pun
Bsbe8 15months ago. your correspondent knows his''
mat three counsel Of upqucstonabe ability integrity
and honor yt-Judgo Parker, Judge Barrett anu "eh'
Martinlac-ccriGed az the tmc together WIN m|Scn'
that in their Judgment tho opinion was erroneous III
every material part, either in fact or IN aWi ana
that the decision was Immediately appealed from that
tho argument OF the appeal was delayed by the other
side until September, $780, when it was argued before
f,u b,neb and has not yet been decided He must
know also, two other things: hrst, that inc
Judce does not anywhere mention me as IN
any respect ocnsurable; and, second, that inc
thirteen persons whom he does name as parties 10
tho alleged combination to obtain control of the Sus
ouehauna Railroad comprise OF the most respeeta
bic and worthy citizens Of the S,ateas, for example
walter : Church. Hamilton Harris, Charles b. Lansing
Jacob Leonard and Charles Courier, men MS lhcapapo
Of wrong as any persons in the country Now must
saw further, that it seems remarkable that
lawyer should drag into tho newspapers coz
tloversies which arc still pending IN court
In every point of view ii is most deslIapio'
not to cay necessary, TO the due administration ol Jul
tice that matters in cour: should be LETT 10 DO 'e' ~
by the courts alone, until at least tie maj
there Judges AID Jurors are but men, Gnd II tnc SUI
,,ri t,o,, ara 70 decide may bc debated before
boud g., tre ucwspapers and public opinion crcGteu
ono way or the other tho decision will be mace, not ny
those who hear the evidence and know inc law" pu' ~
writer's who Lave neither heard the one nor sicu '
other. Both the tcations which your
iscssos are still in the courts, awaiting decision ana
n ,egccion would have satisfied lin that II was De'-
fer 10 wait I'll they had been determined
yih tlesc obs T.. lions proceed TO Tie attack upon
me- In what have TO say, conin' mysoH 10 NY own
tci.ora vinGicatcn. Doing so, b. no means aoht oT
believe that anything IN the least degree improper mas
pf done by any Of my partners. They are all men "a
rrlit, ard Louor They stand ready and able to vind-
cac themselves in their way, and do not need my
a.is.aacc. ~ their request conlnc nyseh TO "hat
concerns ne alone. Tho present attack IS made upon nc
personally, and meet it as such.
The first charge OF the series is the following;
Ell The proceedings by which Mr. Fisk ATTEMPTED, IN
15C, 90 set pJssCsso Of the Albany anI Suluei.1na
l.3i road. have been denounced by Judge J. Darwin
smith rom TIC bench OF the SuITeine Court, as a ~
lent The u in these Proceedings was -lI u ~
icri Ct parie order from Judge Barnard Selling goo
shan OF stock. on prcense that thoy L4 poc .v5S4
issued AID placing them in the hands or IN o&cel or
IN Field as rocclYcrthis receiver, az the reqCet OF
Hr Ticd,s partner inmcdltcy voting with them
against tie intrcsto OF tic owners, although INC only
tr.iense FOR appointing receiver was that the stock
was lot stock al all
Ianswer: !. That the Judges dcnuncation must be
taken with much qualification; That the transaction
speciicd has been greatly misstGtcd; and 9. That
.,hefEer msstated or stated correctly, Lad nothing
whatever to do with it.
First: judge Darwin Smith did It is true dcnonnce
some of the proceedings referred to as fraudulent,
though irust they will yet be pronounced legal and
,ropr: but hc Cd not deaOunco all fraudulent; some
ne conceded 10 DC uuobcctCE7ble. / was it is true,
counsel In Of the proceedings, lu not IN all nor
the only counsel in any Of them; aad so far as a.
vscd bad the concurrence at the time CT subsequent
approval Of al my associates
Tn lie
rrcchedEat IS to say the rCccvcrslip OF tic 5000
rharcshe account given is wide of the fact as 10
seem lie "a buIesquc; thus tic order appointing the
receiver contained provision to show cause against H.
cause was ever shown; the reason for appointing
the receiver was that the stock sold by the Com
pany for only p per cent Of st. par value MI Fuller
whom your correspondent would have you believe to be
an ecer Of mine, fresh from my clce, had left II y
years before, and had been al tho time since in
active practice, and with whom l had not SINCE
had any business relations. He had no intention OF
voting tin the following incident occurred Tho
stockholders being assembled for the purpose OF voting
and the church party having, as they supposed IL
dependent the said 5000 shares, the control OF ma
tory ~ al the stock most extraordinary CT pare IN
junction obtained 10y the Ramsey party was at that mo-
ueDt served upon the church party forbdding their
vote unless Grocsbcc the other holders Of TIE 9CG)
shares should first have the opportunity to vote hee
from Injunction; whcrcupon, TO prevent the manifest
Injustice Of excluding all votes by a majority OF
The stockholders and the success OF the very remark
able device adopted by the Ramsey party, Mr.. FiHer
cast Dis vote upon the 5000 shares, that thereby the IL
junction uy on the majority of tho stock might be re-
moved This was Gone solely for that purpose, ana not
because the vote necessary to the success Of Inc
Cbpreh ticket which was elected by votes independent
OF that cast by the receiver. These facts appear upon
the printed record which your correspondent had before
him Why were they not menuonedf
Third: The appointment Of Mr. Fuller was maze WIN
out uly KNOWLEDGE and in my absence, yOu VIII sec
from my answer TO the next charge.
The second charge is as follows; ,.-,.....
- M Field was n party 70 that hideou7 burlesque
Of Justice by which Judge Barnard was brought down
Cinc Mont in he honsa OF josephine Mansfield
LaRlCT IN ca der 10 remove Ramsey from inc Presidency
OF the Albany and susquehanBa Railroad and appoint
James Fisk. a., rec eiver"
Ianswer: There is in all this not word OF truth.
The appointment OF Courier and Fisk wei as that OF
MI Fuller that is TO say, all tho receiversps and all
the wrs Of assistance and tie inuncOns in nine suits
five the Ramsey party and four from the opposite
party afterward designated the Church party -
were all granted during tie week ending on the
7th Of August, 1900 l in stOckbridgo, Mass,
from the aGh Of July 10 the 9th OF August, and knew
nothing whatever Of the susquehauua controversy till
The evening Of Monday, The 9h on that day received
a Telegram ut sockbudgo requesting me 10 come to Al
bapv and I went in the afternoon trani when ar
rived found my partner, Mr. Sterling acting as AZ
toruey ard Judge Amasa j. Parker and Mr. John Gan
~ octi,e. os conn sell and Immediately joined them; /
then bgarI this narrative viz. that the Board Of D
,ect,r. Of The susquehanna Company was di-
yided into two parties, ono OF which sup
ported Ramsey the then President, making with him
ak in ALL while the other consisted of the Vice-Presdent
Herrick and seven other Directors making eight In all
Who dsspnroved Of the management OF Ramsey as in
,,sous 10 tho road extravagant, and corrupt These
eight Directors for the Purpose of securing majority OF
stock at the approaching election to be held on the 'l o.
september had sought the aid of Gould ana fisK III INC
uuychase OF stock Stock had been bought largely ana