New-York tribune., 1874-10-15
THE COURTS.
sar SIT FOR FIVE MILLIONS.

SYIE SDlI FOR FIVE MILLIONS.
sparxENr BEFORE THE GENERAL TERN IN THE HIS
roRIcAL ERIE SUIT AGAINST CORNELIUS VAN
pERBILr.
The great $1,000, 900 suit by the Erie Railway
Company sgt Cornelius Vanderbilt the inception OF
witch dates back to 1865 when Daniel Drew was one OF
che directors OF Erie reached by the General Term
OF the Supreme Court yesterday and long argument
was had Justice Daniels presided over the Court In
the absence OF ChefJusce DAVIS assisted by Justices
Lawrence and DOnobue. AT one time during the day
considerable crowd listened TO the arguments but there
absence of that partisan attention and comment
which would the matter during earlier
DAYS when CON promises" and hitter strategic fights
between rival railroad managers looked upon with
absorbing interest and with much the feeling that
one looks at confsgration in the dstance-t Is ex-
citing the resuli is immaterial far the locker
on is concerned Later in the day the various
counsel employed had a quiet field in which 10
work but they continued the argument until the hour
OF adjournment and further hearing will be given to-
day. Mr.. Macfarland. with whom were associated
Messrs Larocgue aud Barlow, argued the for The
Erie Rail way, the appellants. and VIM A Beach, asso-
cated with exJudge Porter. recited the points for the
respondent Vanderbilt although his argument was cut
short by the adjournment, and will be finished today
history Of suit has been pablshed and as gath
red from points for the appellant is briefly as
follows:
The present appeal from order OF exJudge Geo.
@ Barnard OF the Ring Judges, who was impeached
az sara$Ogs two years and declared disqualified
from ever after holding office in the State. BE tried
this suit In Supreme and decided in
favor of the defendants As originally brought in 1885,
the action was TO recover from the defendant Cornelius
Vanderbilt large amount OF money and property al
legged TO have been obtained by him fraudulenty and
without consideration, by means OF certain fraud
ulent and cOllusive transactions with the Com
2any's officers aud agents. In February. 1868,
several actions were begun against the CON-
oany by persons claiming 20 have such an
interest in the Company that they had right 10 come
forward 10 protect stO"khoders and the suits were
against officers, and (as the appellants aegeD were
brought AID OF certain stock SPECTATORS An agree
snent was made in Juy lS6o Tor settlement OF tnose
pany violation 6f their duty as trustees and without
luy considerat0n paid S4-g2'o 70 ke9aru % 9cnea ie
EOc00O) 10 Mr.. Vanderbilt, ana Dought OF tne latter
SOj shares the Erie Railway at cost OF $25OJOOO
unirr the guaranteed bonds OF the Boston, Hartford
aud Ere Railway Company of l250COO all Of which 1t
alleged done to make good losses on stocA specu
Mr.. Vanderbilt the plaintiffs was unable to ex-
tort this money usirg the of the supreme
Companys funds-Drew FISK. Could and others-and lie
made them pay this money aod gave MIN TINS STOCK as
against the Company were all Withdrawn afer this set
iement With respect 10 ne answer maze oy tae res
with the Erie Railway and It's AFFAIRS or with tne actions
In question ana maj tne ne eess o 1e M
tween the defendant aud Daniel Drew and jay Gould
action ired before Judge Barnard, in which the Erie
plaintiff appears To have been brought as much Tor
the purpose Obtaining judicial certihcate OF the
character Fisk Gould ana Vanderbilt for anything
else. ,.
The appellants counsel argued that the defendant
Vanderbilt received the noney aad LOnGs with the iu
know edge that they belonged 10 the Efle company,
aud That they were mlsdppFepfateu IN bFedch O ust
ana il is urged that claimants in the several actions
against the Company before referred TO had no real
claim on the Company. On all these grounds me appel
Iants reversal OF the order below and now
Aud now comes the other side of the question. The
the respun1ent say II appears that various
stockholders and tue Atorney General IN the name OF
the people, began shlts 10 Restrain lne hlIMaf NOn
pany alleged fraudulent issues or lts o0nds con-
officers restoration OF such b0nGs ana stock or te pro
ceeds injunction and attachments AGAINST Tue parties
issued for contempt and they ned 10 New-Jersey
as viii be rene mbered by kept pace in that
day with the fluctuations of Erie power and pride
mise az effected the defendant (Mr. VanderDD
in the OF sale of stock The defendant IN his
pany, claiming that has dealings were. IN the nr5t
Instance with Daniel Drew ana We're continued WIN
gave Unlimited orders 10 buy Ere stock,
UPON convertible bonds TO answer the demand the
of which that prices advanced and defend
ant others loaded with STOCK at prices Oey on
its value. The plaiutiifs in the SUITS mentioned
and the defendant Claimed that nat .he5T b Sses
of stock were unlawful, ana tlat thtT LOSSES
shoud De compensated that the averment Of the com
plant mat sOOcOO was paid without consaeraGon @ Is
part Of the settlement that The losses OF deenaant
should made good The Court below onnd tadt mere
fraud, and tlat tAe asreeent i9r ne "a se 80 oi
shares made between the Defendant ana Ar:
with individuals conducting u ana n"t wltA the
Dantlf and that the promise made FOR stayng
OF CLAIMS and difficulties embarrassing 10 inc pialnnn
and iusrlfiaDle under the circumstances
In counsel for respondent further agreed that there
wa o Drylty OF contract any relation between the
defendant and The Erie Railway out of which any debt
or obligation arose between them. Messrs. Drew and
Vanderbilt sWOre the tra, that the contract was be-
tween hem and there no contradictions; and MI.
Vanderbilt refused 20 deal with the Company,
20 which alleged, there was no contradiction lac
object OF Mr. Eicrdge in assuming the contract OF Mr.
Drew 10 pedale oil bonds of Boston. Hartford
and Erie Road Air. Drew 10 cash, aud the sub
sequent eyOatiOus by Messrs Could and Fisk were TO
the accept these bonds as previously
guaranteed part payment and tha the attitude OF the
partles is changed by tue circumstances tnat the
cheeks and securities issued BY the Company used
III the purchase. Respondents counsel argued that
there Was Transaction between the plaintiffs ana the
Oefendlnt and another point made was that no
eydence existed ira bonds guaranteed by the Com
pany were not owned by Eltridge nor that the two
checks for 81 ,Oo0OOO we're not SO owned Conceding
that the purchase made behalf Of the Company,
the would not be altered and assuuI-
rug thai line sale direct the Ere and the pur-
chase ra uFes. the action could not be maintained;
mOreoyer not q siage allegation OF fraud IN the com-
palnt was sus As 20 the actions against Erle
they all EOuOrabe ones to oDilge the Company tO
Illegal ceri ates Of STOCK Issued by ls agents
O. the Court Of Appeals decided.
COMsTOCK DISCHARGED FROM ARREST
Judge Donohue vacated yesterday the order
of arrest In the suit Dr. James Bryan against Anthony
COmstock The case Wa fully reported TWO days ago
in THE TRIBUNE. II brought by Bryan, whose
residence is l4G East Ffteenthst 10 recover dam
q I'D