New-York tribune., 1875-08-20
TIE COURLS.

ST. PAUL, AND PACIFIC RAILROAD SUIT.
APPLICATION or NEW TRUSTEES OF ThE BOND
HOLDERS TO BE MADE PARTIEs-HOw THEY
WE'RE APPOINTED TIE DEFANsE Oh HE MAIN
DEFENDANTS.
An application was made yesterday in Su-
prcuc Court Chambers to Judge Tappen IN the snt Of
wrrion and others against the u Paul ard Pacific Raj
road Company GU behalf OF Jacob =. WctmOre, Thomas
Denny, and Ih0m1s ". P,ar,a 90 be admitted to the
.uit s parties defendant They claim to bc trustee Of
the mortgage under which the plaintiffs hondhoiders
TIE suit the chief part culars oi which have been several
times reported in THE TaBCNE, IL brought IA the name
Of several bankers oi Holland 10 enforce len on railroad
iron purchased with the money they hid advanced
the bonds. aic art OF the iron had been sold ana
pledged ana among lie pledges wa the United states
Naval Department.
Ti SUIT vas brought to follow tho iron into the hands
OF Tie purchasers and PLEDGES, 10 obtain fur the
bon lholdc.- al the rights over Tie iron let n the R9l
road Company, Tie cons, nee, AFR. Moorhcad or Tie
finn of jay Co0le & Co., IN which Mr.. Moogclcad
partner. Several OF tic original defendants II the suit
have been permitted TO sol portions OF the non to meet
thoir advances it, among them the ComlIrr rcia W,t
house Company, wic permitted 70 sc al thc ron
pledged 10 il, and the Navy Department Which per
mtted sell much OF The iion a. was plcaged for
posts made by ii with Cooke. cCuloch d CO.. after the
failure of jay Cooke Co. The original trustees ~ the
molfgarc Of tls road Becker, Ihonns AMI Moore
f0nt.intf n
sduon OF trustees ny tlc bOndhOdeIE. and under
this power it Is CLAIMED that Wetmorc. Pcars,li and
Denny were substituted for them. Their attorneys
Chapman, Scott y CrCNcI, claimed that incy were
Ssary parties. especially as Gciau h been made
IL HE interest the eage and thus they were cnr
tied TO take immediate possession Of Whatever property
Mr. Hubbard .or the defendants in reply stated tie
main defence OF Alr. uooeheid the other clic de
been sent, lie stated, TO Lipman, kOeDthai Co.. ara
disposd Of by them in part through the plaintiff this
Fats tIfg ff mia rH4.
10 O00.0c0 tlcy had reunited 10 this country only
Sl,sOo,OoO cash and 3J,J0J tons Of iron. OF tlis,
$1,000 tons laid TIE road and the remainder w.-
involved III tuIs su The remainder ol the proceeds uf
honE m opcb Of the Ion M and gd M cac on
connected Win tbem. Tu,y sent iron not needed tat
stage instead OF the none needed to pay me 5000 wors
work Gut At las with 100000 due 10 5000 woElmer,
ready 10 turn themselves into mob and tear M inc
work already done, the managers sold and pledged the
t.en useless iron suit brought by LppBau. ROsen-
thai Co.. in Minnesota FOR the same purposes TINS
snit, had failed account Of their Misconduct This
suit, hch their carefully suppr sset hut
Minnesota suit aud IN this suit the agents ~ the palnts
were John :. Kennedy Co.. composed OF thee mem
bers. Kennedy BARNES. aud Baker.
ON April 3, Kennedy and Co. called bondhOlders meet
Ing for Ap1l 10, III NeN->ork The mortgage required
10 ice OF SIX Weehs before ~ c. inr0tig AT the III etiig
two pcIsOs Me,srs. baker and aIBes appeared rope
senuhg; ;s 4'toiheys we % paint' Mr Bakrr on mo
ton oi MI barnes loon the chaif MI Barnes was ap-
pointed secretary by MI Bakey: Mr. Barnes moved the
removal OF the oia trustees. Mr. Baker, The motion
being sccOnGe, put ih' ihe'tIOh ana Was unanimously
carried. Mr.. Barnes mOvod the appointment 0f tho new
carried. Whether this al CtOn valid not f. was
clear that The nothing ruppets
OF the plaintiffs Ia tins 1t fair To- the
PENDANTS thai the plaintiffs should appear defendants
and ebarras tho real defendants by having their repre-
seniaycs that side lie would not object to the sub
htiiuion n these trustees for the plaintiffs must ID
panta-being both sides IL was not ncces
fary for tho protection or any interest that they should
be defendants. They were merely trustees the plain
tbs and Il the plaintiffs proper plaintiffs AT a
then their Interests fully protected and the Court
should lis discretion in favor Of a matter which
could good any and would greatly elnbarrass
the defendants. The Court rceer, ed ito deeision.