Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1882-12-28

1851 shs asFshasht hse isllga e
tsndsf Tie tlEshtlH ~ s5soan. Of col.
leruons made By him sgresabl5 With
The terns Of the said contract, not.
Withstendihg the plaintiff often re-
luested that such monthly statements
be made. Defendant made numerous
payments on account Of moneys due
plaintiff which had been collected, but
refused to mako monthly statements
according to the terms OF the contract.
That under the fourth paragraph of
said contract defendant agresd 10
transmit and deliver TO such other
newspaper as plaintiff might reouire ii
the territory described The SAID news
reports o. plaintiff. Tho plaintiff re,
quested that thesereports Be transmit.
ted ami delivered to the newspapers.
but the defendant refused to comply
With such requests and thereby The
plsintif lost and was deprived Of
large gains and profits which he other
wise would have made and received
that on March IL, 1882, defendant
without any default on the part OF
plaintiff refused to carry out the pro-
visions OF the contract and demanded
u plaintiff q much larger sum than
that provided by the contract for rem
derlog the servies therein agreed to
be performed, and defendant gave the
plSlnttt notice that thereafter be
would no longer carry out the terms
OF the contract, but should charge q
much higher rate than that named 10
the contract. The plaintiff was always
ready and willing to perform his part
Of the contract, and duly offered no TO
do, but defendant continued his re
tusal to perform his part of the con.
tract, except that the service beless
and the price more. The amount SO
demanded by the defendant for traEs
uniting and delivering the REPORTS
exceeded the sun agreed pom la the
contract to the amount of $lO0O0O a
year.
The plaintiff further alleges thai
the defendant after & purchase of the
Atlantic d Pacific elegraph Com
pany possessed and controlled ali the
telegraph lines upon or by which tn,
service specified In the contract could
be performed; that by reason of III.
said breaches of contract the plaintiff
has been greatly damaged in his bus :
ness and has suffered great lo,s
and has been deprived Of ereal
gains aud profits which he should
otherwise have made. Wherefore
plaintiff demands judgment against
defendant for the sum OF So 600, with
interest thereon from April Il lSS.
besides the sum Of $500, 600 damag. s
for the breach of said contract, ana
Tor such other or further relief as to
the Court shall Jeem just in the prem
Uses besides the cost OF this action.
In response to the above complaint
the Western Union Telegraph Com
pany return answer that they are not
Indebted for any Of the said sums, and
that the contract was void because it
was nominally with the National Pres.
Association, James IL, Goodsell,
President, while there was ia reality
no such company or corporation. But
it is admitted that they had acted
under the terms Of the c5ntr O, le
ceived and paid money under it 70
MIR. Goodsell, and had done so for a
year or more in pursuance of the
contract. and hsd therefore treated
With him as the contracting party
during that time.
Mr. Miller, Que Ofthe counsel for
Mr.. Goodsell, said YESTERDAY Il do
not hesitate to say that, in my opinion.
the real cause of this violation ofcon-
tract was a desire to crush all outside
news agencies, and get control of such
organizations for the benefit Of the
Western Union ring, which means jay
Gould" A gentleman who is also
connected. with the case, says that he
knows OF his own personal knowledge
that an overture was made for Mr..
Goodsell to withdraw from the bust
ness, sell cut hi~sinterests and accept a
position as chief Of 3 new bureau,
which the Western Union would es.
tablish. 1t was declined, hence the
I hHalsCW