Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-09-20
LIVELY LAWSUIT.
The Memphis and Charleston Railroad
EpjOiued from Watering IFS Stock
Five Millions.
Also EDjoIned from Paying Big Bonn;
TO the East Tennessee, Virginia
and Georgia.

vile, Ala by w. GraYscn, stakeholder OF
the Memphis and Charleston road, to have
the lease held by the East Tennessee, Vir-
GINA and Georgia railroad annulled, and de-
sirIpg the court 10 have a statement OF Sc
count made between the two roads, and that
all net earnings since the lease was made be
turned over 10 the Memphis and Charleston
stock bolders, because he claimed the lease to
be illegal. He also prayed that a receiver
be appointed to take charge of the Memphis
and Charleston road and operate it for the
benefit OF the stockholders, and further asked
that directors be restrained from passing
$500 900, or any Gum for the abrogation Of
the lease, and that the directors be eujoined
from issuing 900 in new stock, which
they were instructed to do at the late meeting
OF the stockholders. At that meeting Gray
son was present and submitted a written pro-
test against the payment of any bonus TO the
East Tennessee, Virginia and Georgia road
for the lease held by them.
BRINKLEY's SUIT.
Yesterday a somewhat similar suit, but
decidedly more important, was brought in
this city The style of the case is az fol-
lows:
James L. Goodloe, executor of R. C.
Brinkley, deceased, of Shelby county, u.s.
the Memphis and Charleston Railroad Com
pasy, the East Tennessee, Virginia and
Georgia, and V. K. Stevenson, william n.
Harrington, J. a. Hayes, jr., r. D. Frayser,
William E. Rison, g. NJ. Fogg, w. M
Duncan, Jere Baxter, Chales Y. Swan, John
L. Cadwalader, d. III. Evans and C. H.
Phiuizy, directors of the Memphis and
Charleston road. The complainant states
that he is the owner of 1920 shares of the
capital stock of the Memphis and Charles
ton road.
THE WHOLE VALUE
If he afo0 nf he
AS the shares are valued at S25 each, the
complainsnfs stock represents about 500, 900.
The Memphis and Charleston road was
chartered February 2, 1916. The original
stock was $500 900, which has been increased
from time to time until it has reached the
amount above specified. In 1881 acts were
passed by the Legislature amending the
charter, giving it power TO issue guaranteed
preferred or common stock, as may be de-
termined on by the stockholders; and the
privilege was also given TO build, lease or
let acquire by purchase, lease or otherwise,
and operate, hold or dispose of any railroad
or railroads, and the distribution thereof, as
may be determined on by their stockholders
provided it were approved by three-fourths
of the stockholders represented by the stock
at regular meeting. An instrument, says
the bill,
PURPoRTING TO BE LEASE,
bearing date of June 2, 1877, by the Mem
phis aud Charleston of all lines of railroad
and rolling-sfock, sand the property of all
sorts to the East Tennessee, Virginia and
Georgia. On December 2, 1879, an amend
ment TO the lease was made, and the East
Tennessee, Virginia and Georgia took pos
session of the Memphis and Charleston, aud
now holds and operates as owner OF the
ers and directors of the Memphis and
At an annual meeting OF the stockholders
Of the Memphis and Charleston road at
Huntsville, Novembers15, 1881, resolution
was passed that the directors should take
charge of the road. The bill states that the
directors failed to carry out the instructions
possession. Less than three-fourtbs of the
'tock voted in favor of the resolution at
Huntsville providing for 4 consultation be- |
ween committees from each road 10 effect a |
The bill states that an agree |
neut has been entered into and approved by |
he directors to give the East Tennessee, Vir- |
,inia and Georgia
A BONUS
Il $500, 900 for the cancellation of the lease |
# the road. 1t also claims that 5000, 900 |
additional stock is TO be issued. The COM
claimant claims that the effect will be to pay |
10000 for the mere cancellation of the
",
SSl, declared to be not authorized by law;
hat this resolution has not ye. been re-
cinded. The further effect will be TO issue
lew stock-double The outstanding stock.
he complainant says he has neither the
means nor the legal authority to take his
hare of the new stock in his representa-
i've capacity. The further effect will be to
ind the Memphis and Charleston to the
ayment OF the East Tennessee, Virginia and
ieorgia of large alleged Indebtedness of
bout 100000. If the lease is invalid, this
CANNOT BE ENFORCED.
lie believes that unless he gets an injunction
he agreement will be approved. He charges
hat the majority of the Board of Directors
re in favor of carrying it out. He asks the
'ourt 10 declare the lease null and void, and
hat the Memphis and Charleston be restored
D the management of its stockholders, be-
ause the directors refuse to do co. He
harges that there is no power in the charter
D lease the road or 10 issue additional stock;
nat an attempt TO sell stock at less than the
ar value is unauthorized. He says that the
were to be allowed to take the
dditional stock
FOR A LIMITED TINE,
nd if they fail to take it it will be sold TO
ther parties. He states that the road pro-
oses 10 dispose of the additional FIVE
,illions of stock at from eight to ten per
emit. He therefore seeks to epjoin the Mem
his and Charleston from giving the bonus of
100000; and asks that if the directors do
OF take steps TO have the lease cancelled
nat he be allowed to do 80. He also seeks
} enjoin the issue, of the extra stock.
Application was made before Judge Hor-
gan for an injunction, which was granted,
in the Chancery Court.