Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1878-12-06
LAST HEARING OF THE RA ABROAD
DIVORCE.

LAST HEARING OF THE RAILROAD
DIVORCE.
DECREE AGAINST THE PLAINTIFF
LOST PEOPOSITION-THE USUAL Com
MITTEE APPOINTED TO LEASE TIL
ROAD.
&C., &C., sc.
The final hearing of the suit Of the Val
ley R. R. Stockholders for a divorce from
the City of Baltimore and the Baltimore
& Ohio R. R., the ground being crue
treatment and failure to fulfill the mar
riage contract, was finally heard in Judge
Sheffey's Office Tuesday evening. The
hearing was set for noon but the defen.
dant's counsel Messrs. VIM. Keyser, Henry
Duval and Richard Norris telegraphed
that they were on the road and would not
be here till O'Clock. In the meantime
some new faces who have not been hereto
fore identified with the suit were seen in
town. Col. Thomas H. Carter, the Rail
road Commissioner of Virginia, who had
been invited by the Valley Stockholders TO
be present, was one of them and attracted
attention. He is handsome man of abou
forty, with a stylish look and one Of those
listening faces that indicates man that
hears everything and tells nothing. Dur
ing the debate Tuesday night he paid close
attention to what was said, which spoke
well for his endurance. Another new face
was that of the well known Gen. Jos. R.
Anderson Of Richmond who was brought
up on the officers special car on the Chesa-
peake u Ohio Railroad that morning. 1t
| was soon rumored that he had in his eye
the success of proposition from the
Chesapeake & Ohio r. r. to lease the COM
pleted portion of the Valley R. R. This
rumor however was discouraged by state
ment on the best authority that he had
come on private business. The Valley
Railroad Stockholders, and by that we
mean the Rockbridge proxies, who have
most of the life and fire in all the move
ments made, seemed animated all through
the day by secret feeling of don't care
A. which is probably explained by
the fact that one of them, Mr.. A. 7. Bar
clay had in in his pocket telegram from
a gentleman at Richmond, saying that
the contract had been closed about the
new railroad to run up the tow path from
Richmond to Buchanan with Branch to
Lexington. This gives Rockbridge an
outlet if all efforts in the Valley R. R.
direction fail and even if the legislature
refuses to allow her to elope from that or
ganization.
THE MEETING
assembled at 5 o'clock the Maryland in
terests coming in from the cars with an
apology for the detention. Staunton was
represented by Mr.. John B. Evans. who
presided, Mr.. R. W. Burke and Capt.
Thomas D. Ransom; Lexington by Messrs.
S. H. Letcher, W. P. Houston and W. A.
Anderson; Rockbr1dge by Messrs. j. B.
Dorman, A. T. Barclay, Leech, President
of the Board of Supervisors, Ad and
J. M. Gibson, and Botetourt by Mr.. J. NJ.
Spiller The proceedings we're opened by
the reading of the reply of Baltimore
olSA CaO LIZ W. VI W. w Ci1O pIOPOotuAOA4 VI
the Valley Stockholders, an exceedingly
lengthy document.
THE REPLY.
The reply gives history OF the Valley
R. R. Co. The point that raised the storm
was the statement that many of the sub
scribers in the Valley had taken position
near akin to reputation, and then state
ment of how each stands is given which
may be condensed as follows: Roanoke
subscribed 100000, has paid nothing
.Botetourt subscribed 100000 and has paid
$IO5,U0O; Rockbridge subscribed $525, { on
has paid $4,000; Stanton subscribed
$150.00O and has paid $4,000; the first
quota of the private subscriptions, 1913 500,
deposited in the Valley Bank was enjoined
before the company could draw it Balti-
more and the Baltimore & Ohio r. r. have
paid in $2,O2O,00O in cash while the Valley
has paid only $56s, 461 and still owes $751;
SIS
At the close of the reading Mr.. r. W.
Burke moved that it be received and
placed upon record: and the storm which
had been raging in the bosoms of the
Rockbridge men during the reading,
promptly ran down this motion as light
ming rod, tearing up the ground and making
noise of the highest order.
ROCKBRIDGE SHOWS FIGHT.
Mr.. Anderson opposed it's being placed
on record as an unjust unnecessary and un-
called for imputation of reputation on
the people of the Valley.
Mr.. Duval, Of Baltimore city, said the
statements in. the paper were facts and
could be substantiated; if not he would be
glad to hear somebody contradict them.
1t had been intimated that Baltimore and
the B. u o. Company had prevented the
completion of the road for their own pur.
poses and here was the refutation of that.
Mr.. Anderson replied that the state
ment was an ex parte one and untruthful
in the fact that it did not state the whole
of the truth.
Mr.. Keyser said the paper should be re-
corded. Accompanying the Valley stock
holders proposition there had been a quasi
threat OF appeal to the legislature of Vir-
glnia, and lettera had come from promi-
nent gentleman in Rockbridge saying that
if the proposition was not settled, he could
not be responsible for the action of his peo-
pie, nor could he give any assurance that
the NEST radical action would not be ia
ken to revoke the charter or otherwise i'm
pair the road. The reply contained moth.
ing but facts-if there was an erroneous
statement or figure, let it be pointed out.
he challenged any present to point it out.