The New York herald., 1872-11-30
JAY GOULD AND THE ERIE SUIT.

Vhe Exa mtnat1On OF Mrs Tr0vcr0 IRE.
liminary to the Motion to vacate the
Order OF Arrest Against Gould-Free
and Easy Talk or Counsel-Who Got
UP tho Corner In Northwcstern-Lati-
tudinary Fishing Excursion Extrser.
dinary.
In accordance with the usual programme In suits
with which Jay Gould is connected, there are ai.
ready developing motions and counter emotions
and prolonged preliminary wrangling OF opposing
counsel In the late suit brought against him by the
Erie Railway Company to recover some
ten million dollars claimed 10 have been
wrongfully taken by him while having the
management OF Its affairs. The last legal
move was motion made yesterday before Judge
Fancher, at Supreme Court Chambers, to vacate
the order Of reference previously granted to ex-
anime Mr.. william r. Travers In relation to the re-
cent corner In Northwestern in Wall street, the
allegation being that the arrest OF Mr.. Gould was
effected at the instance OF the Erie Railway Com
pany, and was itself part Of stockjobbing opera.
tion. which facts are known to Mr.. Travers, and
testimony regarding which 1t is sought to elicit
from him. The motion was made on the original
anldavlt on which the order OF arrest
was granted, on the letter to Mr.. David
Dudley Field OF Mr. Barlow, setting
forth the conditions which Mr.. Trav ers was will
ing to make the required affdavit and the stenog.
rapher's report OF the conversation between the
opposing counsel at their meeting for the purpose
of examining Mr.. Travers As all this has already
been fully published in the HERALD and is still
fresh In the public mind 1t Is unnecessary to more
than alude to it, For Mr.. Travers there ap-
peared Messrs. Larocque and Mcfarland and for
Jay Gould Messrs. d. d. Field and M. A. Beach.
The argument, as will be seen by the report below
was wholly OF technical character and with
scarcely any reference to the merits OF the case.
ARGUMENT OF MR. LAROCQUE.
Mr.. Larocque opened the argument for the
motion. He began with the reading OF the ahidavits
of Messrs. Trayers and Barlow, which have already
been published such atlidavts simply setting
forth what occurred upon the application made to
Mr.. Travers for his affidavit regarding his proposed
examination before the referee appointed by the
Court. With regard to the legal aspect OF the
original order he insisted that 1t was improvdenty
granted, and that the same would not have been
ton to the application which the hurry OF business
In the court at the time prevented The only ground
that clause Of the code tsection 4oD authorizing
| an examination In case OF refusal to make an
ch r naa een Sad gyen IN TIE
answer any questions put to him IN writing, and IL
these were not satisfactory to answer second lot
OF questions IL was not proper, and the code did
not allow man to be made the subject OF rowing
commission. the real object OF which evidently was
Mr. TRAvERs' PRIVATE AFFAIRS
and upon subjects immateral to the points at
issue. In this connection the opinion Of Judge Ingra-
u Sk.
Chicago and Rock Island Railroad Company was
cited. Alter commenting at some length upon the
leading points embraced in this opinion, he urged
further that in suit to recover money alleged to
have been Incorporated James Gould sets up by
way OF defence release from the railroad com
pany, and upon this claims to be absolved from any
legal action, and also sets up that certain
persons connected with the PLAINTIFF and
interested in the suit had been interested in an
with which the defendant had been connected.
What the other side sought was that Mr.. Travers,
will oft Of Al ha a
on subjects appertaning simply to his private af-
fairs.
Mr.. Beach replied on behalf OF Mr.. Could. On
this motion it was not his intention to go into
the merits OF the suit on %,o WHICH ;h the order
up for argument on Monday next, the
day. assigned for hearing It, he would do
some things then which would not be altogether
agreeable to the other side to hear The Court he
insisted, had been imposed upon BY the snppres,,
arrest. The order was endeavored to be obtained
with an amount OF bail which it would have been
| attempt upon Mr.. Travers. He next took up the
subject Of the release obtained by Mr.. Gould. The
present proceedings he insisted, were brought for
CLOAK FoR JoBBISG AND GAMBLING spEcuLATroNs
IN Wall street: Upon the case coming up on Mon
| day for hearing he confidently expected that the
Court would vacate the order OF arrest against Mr.
Gould. 1t would be singular proceeding II they
were compelled to submit written questions, which
Mr. Iravers should have tile privilege OF con-
sidering and deciding by himself or through
his counsel whether they were per-
| tinent or not. This method OF examina-
! ton would accomplish no result They had con.
| sented that the examination should proceed in
| the presence OF Mr.. Travers' counsel who should
decide ON the materially OF the questions asked ;
| but to this Mfr. Travers would not consent. They
had no desire to pry into any ones private affairs
lie asked that the Court, II IL deemed 1t necessary
should modify the order to examine, SO as best to
| insure the ends Of justice.
| WHAT MR.. FIELD HAD TO SAY.
| Mr.. Field, also appearing for Mr. Gould, reiter.
ated the allegations OF his associate counsel that
they were not seeking to get at the private affairs
| OF Mr. Travers. Before Mr. TTavers and his
counsel they had distinctly disavowed any such
DESIRE lie referred TO Judge Cardozos opinion
| which the other side, he claimed, had evidently
| made the basis Of their argument, as having been
habituaUy disIegarded by the Judge not only o.
this district but OF all the State. Under IT, all they
| would have 10 do would be to present a prepos
| ferrous anldavit 10 the proposed witness and ge
! his refusal. The witness might continue to make
corrections till there would be no end TO IL and NJ