New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-11-30
PRICE FOUR CENTS.
TELEGRAPH LITIGATION.

ARGUMENTS on THE MOTION IN BEHALF OF THB
WESTERN UNION 70 RESTRAIN 1T PERMA-
NENrLY.
The argument on the motion to continue the
temporary injunction recently granted In favor Of tbs
Western Union Telegraph Company and Jay Gould re-
straInng John q. Moore Thomas q. Purify and others
and the Mutual Union Telegraph Company and the Cen
tra Trust Company OF New-york from turning
over to the defendants Baker. Bailou aud Potter,
as trustees any OF the $4,000 and more shares
OF the capital stock OF the Mutual Union
Telegraph Company mentioned in the agreement OK
March o. 1892 set forth In the complaint In the suit:
and restrain the defendants, Baker Balou and Pot
ter from accepting entering upon the trust and from
voting upon dealing with the said 100000 shares OF
STOCK had yesterday before Justice Barrett In the
Supreme Court Chambers. II Is alleged In the com
plant that March 27 1882, Mr. Gould and Mr. Bskor
entered contract with the defendants composing
the firm OF John g. Moore Co., by which about $4,000
shares of the stock OF the Mutual Union Telegraph Com
pany, then belonging to the parties TO the contract
should placed In trust be controlled by Mr. Gould and
Mr. Baker. understood by all the parties to the
contract that Mr. Gould was acting IN behalf OF himself
and Of the Western Union Telegraph Company. The
sole object contract that the majority OF the
whole number Of shares Of the stock OF the Mutual Union
Telegraph Company should be placed under the control
OF Mr. Gould aud Mr.. Baker. and that the western
Union Company should become the owner OF an interest
in the Mutual Union Company. 1t is further alleged
that the Western Union Company afterward did
become the owner Of about 10000 shares Of Mutual
Union stock. The value Of the Mutual Union
sto elk and bonds held by Mr.. Gould aud the western
Union Company depended largely upon the execution OF
the provided for in the contract OF March ~ ills
also said that the plaintiffs had done many things OF
value to tho Mutual Union Company, which they would
not have done except reliance the March con-
tract The plaintiffs had just learned that the defend-
ants in the absence Of Mr. Gould from the state had Sc
cretly entered into conspiracy In fraud OF the
rights OF the PLAINTIFF the sole purpose OF
which to thwart the accomplishment OF
| the purposes Of tho agreement OF March "a. IN
order TO carry the conspiracy the defendants had
agreed to have the stock OF the Mutual Union Company
| including the stock mentioned In the agreement OF
March 27 turned the defendants, Baker, Baiou
and Potter for five TO be voted upon and managed
by In their discretion. An Incidental OF he
conspiracy was to enable the three defendants to control
and mortgage majority of the shares OF the Mutual
| Union stock ia order to raise money To be ex.
pended for purposes against the interests Oh the
| plaintiffs and enter into arrangements with
other telegraph companies to the serious injury OF the
plaintiffs II therefore demanded that Mr. Baker be
removed from his position q trustee with Mr. Gould,
under tho agreement OF March 81 and that successor
be appointed by the Court and that 10 tue mean
time receiver be appointed to take charge OF the inter-
ests of the trust It is also demanded that tho defend
ants be restrained from doing anything whatever In
pursuance Of conspiracy entered into BY them M
Gould In an avt used when the temporary Injunction
was obtained that he conducted the negotiations
in person which led TO the contract of March2 aud that
the NEGOTIATIONS largely had by him with Mr. Ba-
ker The allegations In Mr.. Goulds afdaYt are IN SUD-
stance the same those in the complaint Noryn Green
in his affidavit says that he is the president OF the Vest
erp Union Company and that he is familiar with the con-
tract of March 81 The stock and bonds of the Mutual
IJuon Company referred to the contract had been
| taken and paid for by the Western Union Company.
the certificates being left in the name OF
Mr. Gould The treasurer OF the Mutual Union
company July 1882 called upon Mr. Green ana stated
| that the company expected the Western Union Com
pany to take up seventyfve Of its bonds In accordance
with the March contract Mr. Green caused TINS 10 DC
done Roswell H. Rochester in an affidavit said that
he was the treasurer of the Western Union Company
On 1882, in accordance with the directions OF
the Executive Committee OF the Board OF Directors ne
TOOK the certificates Of STOCK OF the Mutual
Union Company and the papers giving power tS, to
in prce ana indorsed the parcel This 10000
OF stock ia the Mutual Union Telegraph Company Is te
properly m Of the western Union Company bat held by
Jay Gould and George f. Baker Ia trust AS per written
as'''aiHlidis az aHldavt made November iss2, say.
that the negotiations for the contract oL Msren S
were u cArr@ Oh aTd Sometimes through the
defendants. Faanestock Scott and scoded The
WsS tSe to Mr. Gould that they he
interest Mutual Union Company, anu were for the
company and Inc Western Union Company. As a mat
Of fact harmony was established between te CON- M
IN tHe Compliant Mr. could reiterates his former
statement that 1t was well understood by al The persons
for himself and the Western Union Company. NJ
Gould by Mr. scott Mr. Fs6nestock and Nj. Baker were
used Mr scott In his letter asks MT Gonld 10 take
against the Mutual Union Company on the Page patent
also asks Mr. Gopa 70 stop pny a. ister aaea ss
Apri TO- 1882, directed to Jay Gould and George r.
Baker and signed BY S Mssr was S'1 :o sss
The letter states that BLOOD shares oi ,ne ssota R
the Maa m qna 1 a Mr. Bfer Subject 70 ther
ont management and control for year Iae slgners
aea so or peases as Mr. Gould and Mr. Baker should
see dit to make The minutes for June H. 1882 oL the
that Mr. Gould presented tvthe committee the accounS
of his purchase of the stocks and bonds OF te MUTUAL
bonds the Western Union Company AZ tne eo't ana IN
On she part Of The defendants aiidsvts OF John
G. Moore George H. Baker, Harris O. Fahnestocs Eoen.
ofSers Mere read in opposition to the motion. Moore
In mis- aindavit says hat in none of the nesotiaons
/ TItG Union Company stock was. Mr.. Gould un-
derstOod to be acting in behalf OF the, the westeTn
told Tim lac not acting In behalf OF the western
As AS far Sc =: h roo a M
Gould was acting in behalf Of the Western Union Com
ssgs cyrus se Field Era;as possibly
the defendants far referred to the stock pool
was performed Dy Tue uepost v. va sD "a.
Western Union Company ever interested in the So
called mp in the complaint or that 1t ever COZ
money the purchase OF Mutual Union
Company's stock. On the contrary. Mr. Gould
| paid for all the stock and bonds ex
cept seventy-hve In regard to these bonds. Mr.
Moore declares that he is Informed that the Western
| Union Company paid for them by the order Of Jay
GoId. 1t is admitted that come Of the directors oi
Mutual Union Company knew OF tie agreement ses
up in the complaint but II Is said that the directors OF
company never took any action In regard TO IL MI
Moore denies the assertions OF Mr.. Gould Ia regard 10
the purposes object OF the agreement. MI Aoore
also denies that Il intended by any OF the parties
the agreement that MT Gould and Mr. Baker should on