New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-11-11

ON Row
Canai,st: Lconidas A. vanpraag neckhes OF NO. 80
BoWery.
RAILROAD CONSIGNMENT ENJ0lNED.
THE REMOVAL or IRON CLAIMED BY THE NORTHERN
PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY PREVENTED.
Application was made to Judge Barrett, slt-
ting in tho Supreme Court yesterday, by Eyars, South
mayd Choate as counsel for Lucas Hendrick Weetjen
and others for an injunction restrain the st. Paul
and Pacific Railroad Company aud Others their
agents, attorneys. or servants, from using, sell
ling, hypothecating, incumbering, disposing OF,
or in any interfering with 10000 tons
OF iron rails lying on storage upon the
premises OF the defendants Woodruff & Robinson, In
Brooklyn or elsewhere In the State Of New-York The
papers presented upon which the application was based
were voluminous The summons, complaint aud an aii'
dsyt alone covering pages OF full pamphlet size. The
following IL the substance OF Mr.. Barness sihdayt
That the action Is brought by the plaintiffs both IN their
own behalf and also in behalf OF all other holders OF tue
bonds OF the First Division OF the ST. Paul and Pacific
Railroad Company secured by mortgage Of the ST.
Paul aud Pacific Railroad Company, who shall come IN
and contribute to the expenses aud avail themselves OF
tue benefits thereof Tho defendant, tho ST. Paul ana
Pacific Railroad Company, Is corporation ereaten ana
thereby authorized TO construct certain railroads
within that State, and the defendant the First Division
Of the ST. Paul and Pacific Railroad Company Is another
and distinct corporation created and organized by ana
under the laws of the said state Of Minnesota ana
thereby authorized to contract for and engage In the
construction Of the railroads Of the sam irstnaned
company. That on April 1, 1871, the two companies
made agreement whereby tue First Division Com.
pany agreed 10 construct aud equip for the So. Paul
Company 3ls miles OF railroad namely from St Cloud to
st. Vincent and IRON Matab 10 Blnnerd 10 Mhnnesota
and also TO loan TO me last named Company s5OoOOO IN
bonds OF the First Division Company 20 be secured by
! the mortgage hereafter mentioned ana TO DE assumed
by the ST. Paul Company ana pursuant TO sucn con-
slrHction contract me tirst DIVISION company re,
solved to r the hands 81 trustee. hereafter named
it, bonds to the amount OF S5OO0OOO, being Of $1,000
each, payable to the defendants, Horace Thompson
| George l.. Becker. and William. q. Moorhead,
| as trustees, or TO bearer, on jan l, 1901, and
bearing interest at tho rate OF seven per cent
! per annum, payable semiannually the bonds
10 the amount stated were made to the First Division
Company and placed N The lands OF said trustees sun
securing the payment of the same according TO the con
tract made mortgage and delivered IL into the hands
OF the trustees named-sad mortgage recltng the agree
mcnt the companies aud the resolution OF
| coyenanting with the said trustees for the benefit
of any and all persons who should become holders OF said
bonds any Of them TO pay the bonds &c, when
due aud the better TO secure the payment.
OF said principal aud Interest conveying by way OF
equipped. The 81. Paul Company made the First Diys-
ION Company lease o the road for ~ years Soon afer
Company actually sold 10 the plaintiffs and TO others
100000 OF said bonds and received from such pur-
cbsscrs thereof S30000O IN money; and the said Com
pany also received 100000 in money by OF the
hypohecaton and pledge OF 4Z7o more OF said bonds 60
bonds 50 purchased the eytent Of TO00OO George L.
President Of the First Division Company at
tie time of the transactions mentioned soon after the
making OF the mortgage ana construction contract. ana
while bonds being negotiated, the defendants,
Becker and Moorhead. in disregard and violation Of
their obligations and duty trustees and with view
10 the diversion and appropriation which subse
| 0uenty made OF the moneys realized on the sale
OF the bonds entered INTO contract, when wa. cN-
ecuted on May H. 1874 purp0rtng to he q contract
tween the First Division Company and said MOOread,
whereby MOOrEcId undertook 10 build and equip the
whole o. The said railroads with money be furnished
by tue First Division Company from the sales OF the
ION NJ such Undertaking that Moorhead should be paid
ana receive all proceeds OF tho SAID issue OF
| bonds amounting TO sl5,e0:cOo Tor. agreement was
not in good faith with latent on the part Of Moor
head perform the work. but Tor the purpose OF enabling
him TO oOtan uncontrolled possession aud use OF the
s' co ana Comfy Of Yorh
said city, being duly sTcrn depO'eth ana Satin that hc
Is OF the firm OF j. . Kennedy Co. OF said city,
which firm has OF late ieiIs been largely engaged In the
railroad iron business and ~ FAMILIAR with said trade
ana those engaged therein III NcN-i"rki thdt In sall
trade 1t wei known aud notorious that the trausac-
tons OF the firm Of Jay Cooke Co in railroad iron have
generally been conducted through the nIm OF fO0Ie,
! Vibbard Co.. WHO are a house dealing In rails
and railroad supplies on commission mat depOuents
firm has had business with jay Cooke Co. dnrlng the
last year in rails and have been referred by them Ia
FOote, Vbbard Co, who after such reference acted
for them That since me failure OF Jay cooke GO. De
ponents firm received an order from English house
who had consigned cargo of ou OF about 900 tons OF
rails 10 JAY Cooke Co. rs FACTORS To take sald rails irom
them and hold the same for account OF said English
house paving TO ,Jsy Cooke & Go. their I ad-
| yances thereon; that On application to Jay
! Cooke n co. for the purpose, they Informed
deponents firm, That oil their railroad iron business
was conducted by FcOte. Fboard IL Co.. and that those
rails were held in their name. aud the said FOOte Nib-
bard CO.. on to t9em OF tne advances OF Jay
Cooke Co., transferred SAID rails 10 opponents nrm
and conducted all tho business herewith for the said
firm OF jay Cooke Coz that after The failure OF the
firm Jay Cooke * CO., deponent applied behalf Of
the bondhoders who plaintiffs in this suit to Harris
G. FahnestOck, Of the members OF the said firm Of
Jay Cooke Co.. Tor an account OF statement OF the
! rails purchased. with the proceeds OF the
! bonds mentioned In the complaint In this action !;
! mat the said FahuesiOck declined to furnish any
such account statement concerning such rails unless
the SAID bOndhOlders would recognize the claims OF the
said firm of Jay Cooke Co. upon the same; that subse
| sucnty depOnent wrote and sent note TO said Jay
Cooke CO. whereby he offered 10 agree that any such
account or statement which ght received from said
trm of Jav Cooke Co. should be without prejudice to
any teir rights that the said note was returned by
me said jay Cooke & Co. unsatisfactory, they re-
oniring as q condition to the giving OF any such state
cn account that the said bondholders should fully
recognize and acknowledge the claims of said firm OF
lay CnOkc q Co