The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1878-04-17
RAILROAD LITIGATION.

HOW THE PACIFIC RAILROAD OF MISSOURI rs
SUIT FOR NEARBY FOUR MILLION DOLLARS.
A suit giving the inside history OF the reorg anza
ton Of Pacific Railroad Of Missouri recently
comm enccd IN tho Superior Court aud has assumed
definite shape, the granting yesterday, by Judge
Scdgwick, or a motion TO amend tho complaint.
Tho action Is one brought by Peter Marie, Frank A.
Otis. George X Fearing, N. A. Coudrny, Robert +.
Cutting and jacob Cromwell, against Cornelius K.
Garrisoa and John r. Denny.
CHARGE
Tho facts OF the set forth In the complaint
arc as foilows:-Thc plaintiffs and Denny owned,
either their right In for Others With
full power OF disposition. $4,000 shares OF the capital
stock OF tho Pacific Railroad OF Missouri OF 800 each,
amounting aggregate s. 900 900 par value.
Garrison at tho t,mc held claimed to hold .
msjornv OF the namely, 81, 300 900 out OF
issue OF $1,000 600 issued by the Pasinc road, ana
known ss third mortgage bonds These bonds. as al.
iogcd, wero OF doubtful validity ana obligation
against the Pacific read IL being claimed by
the stockholders that the bonds coll
lusivcly aud lrauduisntIy issued, that tho mort
gage given TO tho Unauthorized
ana that the whole scheme was gotten up by tho
Pacific ROAD. by tho terms Of the bonds tho interest
thereon did not come duo until May l. 1915. Garrison
and others claimed that :herc past duc two
annual coupons for ntcfcsi and they expressed great
road, alleged, NJ the time In the hands Of
directory hostile anu adverse to the stockhoiders
COLLISION suit had been begun by Garrison aud others.
by George G. kcichum Who claimed TO be bond.
holder 10 iorecose The mortgage which SUIT was thon
pending IN missouri Certain OF the stockholders Of
the railroad intcryencd In tins SUIT and nicd
bill alleging collision ami fraud.
la March, lsId as Is further stated, an agreement
was entered nto between tue parties with view OF
compromising tue conflicting claims and establishing
rison enabled To decree OF foreclosure nd
sale OF the road. Nv this agreement Garrison, II no
Uccse the purchaser under the foreclosure SALE was
10 organize successor company TO wnicn he was 10
convey tho property purchased The capital OF this
company 10 exceed s., ooo,o Amer cxccu,.
tng snew mortgago TO pay on INC claims OF The third
mortgage bondbolicrs nc to deliver TO tho plain-
M and Denny IN return tor tho amount OF stock held
by them $4,000 shares OF tho now stock
As THIS agreement was cxccutory one tho
Plaintiffs ,ncy induced 10 TO II becauso
| Garrison represented himself to be wealthy aud
promised 20 use his wealth aud influence TO induce tue
holders OF the bonds TO act WITHOUT their COOPER
atoa and consent, the plaintiffs say, tue mortgage
would OF have been ioreciosed except alter ris oy
The Court, the rcsuI. OF which was doubtful lhe com.
tho Pacific Raroad Company, bought tho premises al
The foreclosure sale anu Dd IN the same NJ 600,
which was At tho rate o. scven.yays per cen. upos
In third mortgage BOMBS too sum bid by him 70 the
extent OF $3,pis,tO0
The means OF making THIS bid, as further alleged,
mostly furnished 10 Baker by Garrison, aud that
Baker Garrison became the real purchaser, aud
he In coDucca,ou with Baker. proceeded 10 rcorganzs
| the new company unuer tue name OF thc Missvurt
Pacific Railroad Company, and Baker. Tor tho Of
Harrison, assigned tho purchase TO the company.
The plaintiffs charge that Baker incapacita sed
i from purchasing tue road by means OF his being The
solicitor OF the old company, aud that he could only
purchase, u at all, as tho representative OF the
| oondhodcrs under tho mortgage sought to be fore.
closed They charge furtnor that Garrison, regard.
less OF the duties and yations under his asrccenL
| refuses 10 issue tho 80 QUO OF the company's
stock IN exchange Tor the Pacific stock, the plaintiffs
damage, t3,UOOOuo. In conciusiou tho conpla nj
states that Denny refuses TO DO made party pinu-
I'm, aud TITS, therefore, makes him party defendant
The original compliant was demurred TO the
ground OF misjoindcr OF partes, anu the present
| tou 10 amend tho complaint was then made A mo.
ton for IN extra allowance BY che dsisndasu ~.
L MED