The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1875-01-29
OPENING OF ARAILROAD WAR
Two First. Mortgage Creditors Charge the
Mobile and Texas Railroad
Company.
A Move on the Board Of Directors.

: e. D. Morgan and James A. Raynor hav
filed bill in chancery against the Pontchal
tram Railroad Company, Thomas II. Hun
and John B. Latitte, as well as the Presiden
and Directors Of the Bank of Mobile and tn
New Orleans and Mobile Railroad Company
The complaint sets forth that the New Or
leans, Mobile and Chattanooga Railroad Com
pany was chartered by the State of Alabama
in 1866 and that by subsequent act of the
Legislature was empowered to borrow none,
on mortgage. On the 1st day of January
1869, it is alleged, the company made deed
of trust and mortgage to Edward Morgan and
Cakes Ames, In order to secure four thousand
$1,000 bonds payable in the year 1910.
Under this deed Of trust, Morgan and Ames
and James A. Raynor, trustees, claim to be
largely interested in the road and DESTROYS OF
securing its welfare. They set forth that the
interest on the bonds was not paid on the
| first day of July, 1874, according to the tenor
OF the deed OF trust, nor since. That by rea-
son OF this default the trustees claim they
have the right to the possession of the road,
as the New Orleans Mobile and Texas Com
pany, the successor Of the original corpora
ton, has licensed the complainants to enter
into complete control of the line.
They claim to have first mortgage bonds
issued under the deed of trust, and assert
that all the provisions Of this act apply also
to those issued subsequently to Henry J.
Gardiner and Peter Butler on the Stb of
March, 1869, who are second mortgage cred
tors.
The bill goes on to set forth, in ertenso
that Gardiner and Butler, in 1873, filed bill
IN chancery in the United States Court to
toreclose their mortgage, and the road was
soid under judgment of court and purchased
by them for the bond holders
These bond-holders then formed the pres
ent company under the name Of the New Or
leans, Mobile and Texas Railroad Co. 1t is |
stated that in the deed of sale given by the |
officer OF the court, there is condition by
which the new companys rights were to be
subject to Morgan and Raynor's rights.
The new company, in order to extend its
made purchase of seven thou
sand one hundred and eighteen shares of
stock of the Pontchartran Railroad Company,
which gave to the company the control Of the
Dad III the election of directors. 1t is further
'lalmed that this stock so purchased is sub
ect to compliments deed of trust and there
ore liable to be taken with the road.
This stock it appears was hypothetical in
>ew York by the New Orleans Mobile and
Texas Company, but was redeemed by the
lew company. This redemption, it is stated, i
Fas made with moneys arising from income
oils, profits, etc, already pledged to the COM
claimants. The stock is now deposited in the
ank of Mobile, and stands in the name of the
efendants, and has not been delivered to the s
according to a resolution of the C
oard Of Directors, but on the contrary re- t
olutlon has since been passed to have an S
lection OF directors for the Pontchartrain n
Dad, and Latitte and Hunt have received b
roXles to vote for this stock. f
The bill sets out that the complainants n
aim to have transfer of the stock, and that a
, person can properly represent the same in Il
ny election. They therefore ask that the o
7fendants be called upon to show why this h
ock should not be surrendered to them. An Il
junction to prevent the defendants from d
sroslng OF these shares in the Pontchar- b
AIN railroad Company as prayed for and
Of their title under their deed of n
lSt asked ~