Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1872-02-22

An Answer once and For All-HO FUR
her Necessity for EeuBpa-
per ContFoyersy.
A DOeumeaf hat Speaks for Etseif-
The Courts VIII Settle the Dispute
Absut FFsighttng Privileges.


DOezmeat that Speaks for TtseIf-
b Courts VIII settle the Dispute
About FFsighttng Privileges
As was 70 be expected, the suit com
msDced BY the Memphis Frsighting com
pany against the city Of Memphis and the
Mississippi River Elevator company Is
attracting attention, and the newspapers,
course, are making their comments.
Nov, It Is not the purpose Of the COM
plsinant, mol viii It's counsel permit It to
10 30, % Htigate its rights in the neTa&
We have selected the courts Is The
proper forum for thai purpose, and expect
70 be ready for cur adversariss there. But
in order TO correct
CERTAIN ERRORS
into which the Daily Ledger OF he 10th
has fallsns and TO prevent sim Ar mis-
ststemen5s which Ike thsss ny be IN
Willingly made, ~ ignorance, a card u
written. That paper, under its river in
telligences" gives the "Freighti1g COM
pany" his notice:
The Memphis Frslghting company was, Il
seems, incorporated ny The legislature in 1864,
with a capital stock Of s34,o0O mary dollar OF
which was ever paid I'M. They claim the eX-
elusive right OF the river trOnt for the purpose
U BlAAAAAAA tAEHhlQEsr EhlAEDd4 QsUQl LAFAuK
tracks, etc. but have been idle since lS56, never
having mad the nrst step OWardthe erection
OF elevators or dePots, and now that the city
mas granted the privilege OF erecting an els-
valOr-and the building Is partly Constructed
0y the St. Louis Packet -mpany-t
Ireigntng company now file their bill
against the city and the packet company, as
we stated some days since they would. and
endesVor 10 stop work On the elevator, throw
ing forty OF Fly men out Of employment II
the injunction is granted = leather medal
should be provided Uy the river men for the
Judge who 50 far forgsts his duty as to lend his
Office 70 place a restriction upon commerce.
We see the milk IN the cocoauuL. butdo moi
think the Heighting company will succeed IN
getting any bonus rom the packet company.
THE IEACURAOLEs
Of that statement are as follows:
First-Ehst mary dollar Of the Hcapi-
tai stock was ever paid in" On the con-
trary, some thousands OF paid-up capital
stock are in tbs hands OF rightf1l, legfti-
mate bOlders, ard still other thousands,
which might avs gone to pay for STOCK,
ware necessarily consumed BY the stock
holders who advanced 20 defrzy the cost
OF litigation which the hostility of the
board OF sldermsn made necessary. The
company is amply abe Sc any mOmsRs
Ihsn the city authorities rse1gaiz3 It's
jast rights TO fUlfu ell ths oblgs siOus Of
ats charter, and Ell ysl It's p~uYilsges.
Seeond-The company does not and
nsvsr has claimed
'THE ExCLUsTvE RIGRr
of the entire river front for the purpose Of
building elevators" etc. The claim Of the
company Is simply 50 much OF the front
As the legislature has given il, and the
prior right to select that location as
against any company or individual not
chartered or e-nfranchlsed before it.
1hird-rne company has not "bsen idle
since 1855 never having made the hrst
step toward the erection OF elevators"
etc, On ths contrary, -immedissely aftsr
its organization it commenced to nego-
tiate with the board Of mayor and alder
men for terms Of agreement, By which
the formal mode OF cOndemning the land
might be avoided, aud . contract, mu-
tually advantageous for the city and the
company, might be made, and that nego-
tistion was continued until T. failed, and
on its fsilure ths company at once COM
mencsd suit to enable il to maintain its
right to have the necessary condemnation.
This suiE was prosecuted to a 6nAl deci-
sion in
THE SUPREME COURT,
and that decision being against the com
pany, it immediately applied 70 the Isgis-
lature Tor an amendment OF its charter to
meet tbs requirements of the supreme
conrt, and this amendment was granted.
Upon this it revived negotiations
with the city council, snd It was very de-
sirous ofa recognition by the council, and
It made offers 70 the city of terms Is lib.
srsl ss any that ware made by anybody
else, snd it was prepared 70 execute those
offers.
But the city council, although this was
A HOME CORPORATION,
although il had q charter twice passed by
the Legislature, and therefore the sanction
nP = aOuarafUu frarahTad olahon.h e
made offers not exceeded in Hberality,
which l. was ready to guarantee the exc
cut1on OF, not only efused TO make terms
with Il, but wholly refused 20 consider its
offer, and did violencs to the habiLaal al
dermsnie coed breeding by refusing q
polite answer to a respectful business
application.
At the same time, through its officers
and attorneys, the company put the city
council in full possession OF its claims,
supporting those claims by argument,
U the OFFER made, bsing in q spirit of
concession and hberslity, contained
ACTUAL RELNQUIsHMEETs OF CHAR
TERED RIGHTS.
Not only was the city council thus In
formed, bat the compliments attorneys
gave ful information TO the agent Of the
adversary and nonresident compsny. It
furnished TO him the books containing It's
charter and the amended charter, and the
decision OF the supreme court in the for
mer case, and this sgent Wss distinctly
notified that this company did not intend
to absndon any OF its rights.
So well informed have the city DUN
Gil and its associate been Of the rights of
complainant and their probable maintain
aree, that the city has required and It's as
5Ociate has given ssocurity to indemnify
and save tbs city harmless "a against any
CLAIM FOR DAMAGES
The complainant may hereafter make.
Whether the city can recover on such an
indemnity being an indemnity given for
.he doing OF 8 wrongful and Legitimate
in the nature Of maintenance or bar
ratry or ehamperty) it would be well
for the mayor snd council to con-
lider inasmuch as q suit Is now pending
lgsinst the city for heavy damages for .
Transaction very similar to this. But 30
: lie, under all these circumstances the
council not only sighted and neg
eetsd a home company, bat deliberately
TREATED WITH RUDENEss
t. business propositions, prsfsrring to
AXE hold Of a foreign rival Offering no
otter conditions.
Fourtb-Thorsiore the innuendo that
his bill Is fled by surprise after all that
hs st. Louis Packet company had done
> EAA1ACO11s
Fifth, and lsst-After these inaccuracies,
8 20 b other matters 1t IL hardly neces-
airy to correct the error as to the injunc-
No injunction is asked except on
u1 hearing at the decision Of the whole
Rse. The city and It's associate viii
iot be stopped until final hearing; the
can go on with It's work, the other
81 hold on 70 its indemnity. Both have
one thus far with full knowledge OF tbs Z
osd. No EFFORT is being made to frighten
hem. And as to any
BONUS FROM TIE PACKET COMPANY,
; viii be time enough for their sgents or [
1ends to decline such when il Is asked.
would seem, up to this time, that they
refer to take chartered rights with. !
At a bonus, and 80 far tbs city council !
joined them. We would be glad If all
be correspondence to the city nom the 9
'reighting company should be published, ]
u we are entirely willing to submit to z
lst public sentiment the conduct OF this
Dmpany in this whole transaction.
d. K. MoRAE,