New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-02-25


"a buv the Frnch Company. and they have DOT doe
nr IA me Globe Company any interest IN tne sun
Lrerch Company except that In lts capaciy ~ n
comnany OF telegraph shares IL 10 the Ioioer VI '"'
Tbrteenti~And further that my comtnnnca
tons r. The SAID Jay Gould are no, nor nave 'ney ever
been cflciai - ,n. Tho .9.c, NJ src1
arrau gemenjs between the eai,e c"npars nas - a.
enable them TO benefit the publicity aicdncuon VI
acd that result o. ne m ,%fasrsp6
nInth Of this ain avit. such reduction HAS Aeu p"o0
to tue extent OF 333 per cent.
ME- DILAPITID'5 ARGUMENT.
Mr. De,o9d I'm opeuing skctched the history OF ocean
,eleerapby and tie several agreements made by
the cable companies aud the land telegraph comlm-
MOS On January IS, 1881, he continued jay Gould ana
his associates were associated as new cable CON-
many Il is obvious that II YVES their Intention
10 obtain. in some way. all the cable business OF
tile country This suspicion was confirmed on thc TO-
lowing day, when the agreement for the consolidation
of the three land companies appeared But 1t was not
until February D. when the defendants served ther pa
peers. that the iul ehect OF The pow AIMED AZ CIV, c sb
companies was made manifest. Ii thcn appeared tuuI
December 49, $780, Jay Gould made an agreement WIN
the American union wnetGoS ne iI,on releoTapb
Company And he contract was maze Win II company
which was then bound by INC most strngtnt min
ilcges -.
mens to give all its business TO each OF three separate
cable companies II will have no remedy against the
Atlantic ana Pacific Tel graph Company because the
latter company will be denued of every except us
name. The counsel for the defendant companies WI
justify the agreement of amalgamaion Of January ~
1881 by quoting the Act OF the Legislature Of
New-York OF May 2. 1870 They VIII sHy 'haI ,.is
act had been complied with, end that SeC-
sion OF the Supreme CO. Of the State OF new
York has cemented their rights and tat me a4
for an injunction late. The transfer Of the properly
was hastily stealhily and cOvertly execneo 10 deirae
the interest of opponents, and 70 avoid ne
mandates OF the Courts The Direct Cable Company nau
right rest securely ON the Acs of Congress ~ va"
clear that the State law having been passed tou
after the Act Of Congress- must be fead -
act Ii is subordinate the act Of Congress Ihe aGs
OF Congress form part If the contract petWefn G
Atlantic and Pacific Teiegraphlo Company ara he
Cable Company. Counsel will say that me caDc con-
panies themselves have entered into similar me
between themselves. There Is no smhally Det"een '
| two classes II CONTRACTS ,. =, -, ..oo,,,od
from Mr.. PeckhaI counsel Tor the Union tr9 9 o
pany who unable 20 be present. on account % Wv ,hs
Uniun Trust Company cOncerned up to ne line 81
issuing the preliminary Injunction The 'idayiI Wa WA,
pny had ispaed some sci O23 $50 certificates Of the
When the Injunction was received there had been no
stock and bonds Of the American Union ieegrapn COM
many received and only 100 shares OF the Aantl3 anu
Pacific Telegraph Company had been denSFehd 10
Trust Company for which a es W. The ali
| davit was placed on hle.
| NOT AGREEING WITH MR.. DELAFlKLD.
| "Mr Delaheld" said Judge BlatchfOrd. i see that
your argument proceeds from certain view OF the acts
of Congress- 1t occurs to that your view Is not al
all permissible. The way 1t strikes me is this; lhi
Western Union Company has the right under the
law to maintain operate Its lines as they are To-Day
after tbs transfer has thus taken place as they nae
before January 10. Now 1T says here that before any
| telegraphic company shall exercise any OF these
! powers-in other words, before 1t sinai
operate its nes-t shall file ITS acceptance with IN,
Of the restrictions and obiRatloh
required by law The Western Union COMPANY nas
condition II is tDat the rights ana privileges graheu
by the Und STATES sa A0 or persoa What is III
meaning of thisi Simply that no company that IL eonS
10 exercise these privileges sha transfer then 10 any
company OF party has accepted The restrictions
II is mere question between the United states ana tn
by fltng an acceptance II has nothing To do with ia,
consolidation OF the stock Of the companesi
states has nothing TO DO with auy hing OF ihat SORT
AS read Theses acts" replied Mr. Delaheid " thel
provide that after having pea raS %S9n 90 Ine be1
Obtain certain rights and privileges which are uescrpe'
in the statute Thesc rights aud privileges ar the on
fights and privileges under which the companies conl'
operate outside OF this sate-or outside nI ms cry II
nDder III Dayigsbie waters OF he United slate TIT
| statute, understand IT, requires that these rRAI
| Judee Biatchford-" But IN this case the Wester
Union Company does not get these rights aud privilege
| poles and batteries OF the other colnpa
nes by transfer but they had these rights ana pIiveET
themselves before the transfer OF actual properly 10
virtue OF their having fled their acceptance with t
II yonr Honor viii hear that question:" gal,
Joseph II. CnOate Z" think we shall be able 20 sh1s
which place In the Senate during me dscusso,
which preceded the passsgs OF tne Dieat .a wa
the prevention or rather the withholding fr0m any
these cOmnanies Of the right 10 sell out To anotHer CON
nanv ar set of uefsOns its lines. rights properties
In order b. prevent exercise OF the teegraphe iran
ehse rs monopoly, as Is done here ny inc pIopo'o'
| consolidation" 49, , ~
d,scns sed the omairamaton contract. lie said that II
was allowed to go into operation WOuu cOhCcntIt
the whole telegraph business OF the country ln'o III
| hands OF the Western Union Telegraph Company .
Mr. swnyne, for. the defendants, s1d that lhe Cuut
was asked to decree that the defendant should caLS
an improbable business for the sake Opan incidents
right TO be enjoyed by The plaintiff He demedihht ~
complainant was entitled 10 any RELIEF on the ldct'
Nothing was clearer Than that If the paintIH had al,
| RIGHT in the properly Of the ueIehu1ut
| IL was his duty in the COutt 81 Change
TO charge that right the property itself 10 the mana
| of the transferee. The business Of the Atlantic an
Pacific Telegraph Company ha1 long been uhpr'n a. By.
| and the shareholders lad declared IL TO be 80
were therefore, hi face to face with the demand
the com planant that the Court should decree "a,
snould st be carried In The face OF Oss ana liih
that such decree Is preferable 70 charging rig up0
the property concerned by way OF an equitable Hth
Further argument posi- p1ned until oaturuay hor
ing,