New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-02-06
THE COURTS.
. rpllsT FIlND SUIT.

, s,,D,puornERs AGAINST THE TRUSTEES on TliB
ON ,uERIoAN EMPRESS COMPANY PROPERTY.
a,,it involving S56O0,0OO was argued be-
o., r,aoe Lawrence yesterday IN Part IL of she gu
,'..,se Oourt u Is entitled Flandrow and Others
nst lanes c FARGO, and IL brought 10 establish the
bts OF the sorphodors the possession of the trust
,nnds Of what s known as the Old American Express
Companv Tue trust arose when the American Express
Company was consolidated with the Merchants Union
EXPRESS Company, The former having contributed Only
20 Dor cent Of ITS property, thus leaving 70 per cohF
which was placed IN MI Fargo's hands as the trustee
for she distribution OF e among the shareholders h'Ss
Cele Boards!ee appeared for MI Fargo the trustee
Yesterday. and made motion To compel certain scrip
holders Gucluding tho plaintiffs who have sned the
trusted 70 submit their rights 20 judicial judgment
syon already IN the suit Of willard against the trustee
Messrs Charles Tracy aud T. l. Audrews, IN opposing
the motion said that suits had already been begun TO
prevent the sale OF these trust assets to the American
Express Company that when tue trust was cou"''" w
him Mr. FARGO announced 70 the stockholders
TINT the 80 per cent applied to the con
soudaLon was worth s. 10000, and that he he'd
the remainder for their benefit DC distributed among
them as dividends that OF this amount ne had paid ont
about $4,000 and prepared 20 soil the balance OF
the assets, amounting 70 more than &0Nooo Tor So
10000 20 che present American Express Company al
the time when thc scrphoders' suit enion him from
making such sale instituted. The counsel further
stated that Mr. Fargo he large stakeholder IN the
proeent Company 10 which he proposed 10 make the
sale and that he cOnsumnated the sale during the
interval allowed for answer % the fut 10y the scrip
holders which had been brought TO prevent thdt very
Aing About the same ume the eult o! willard Was
carried TO Judgment, 10 the provisions OF when al
fargo trying TO force FandIOW ana me OtlcI
scrip holders TO submit their rights. Counsel also
retted adaylts alleging tua willard was formerly MI
FlreOs clerk and m COLLISION with him m bringing thc
SUIT 20 conceal NJ FrgJs transactions 10 regard 10 the
trust funds. a..
THIS statement the Trustees counsel absolutely denied
the truth OIL insisting that they had eut 10 Their mo-
ton on decisions Iugc- ago Lansing Pdecs
Reports Kerr AIT b.UdEttt az D. " 90 the eAeot
that where creditor Of trust estate had oJttAeG
Judgment for an accounting Che Other creators shOuII
b. restrained FROM suing ON ttcr own behalf Ior het
accounting; ami hy these che suphoider could not as
ppto inc uistunuLou OF the uu,t aCI lne hiId case
bad gone t0 Judgment
In reply 10 this argument tho counsel for the scrip
holders argued tna the alleged cOulon made The suite
imperative g. Nf % ne ViIcr pRlesi tHi le deels-
IONS referred ia applied 10 cases 81 di1eeul character
from .s The counsel explained IN detail the dis
unCaou and Application. me present motion could
nave foundation only, he ead, in the old Clanccry
Practice which had been superseded by the provisions
81 The Code; that in tho judgment 90 which IL
deaVOrcd to force The plaintiff 10 pubmit there
fiu conspiracy; tnc -ut of willard, fact, involved
simple arcoUuuuQ while the present SUIT raised Qucs-
u.Hs o. fraud and Dld feltl. Tine plaintiffs, finally,
W,.a cot. -si O. tJ1l 5v ilIy
A,ier t1s aTgu0tuf. Judge Lawrence took he papers,
rcs,lNlLe oetisi.l.