New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-02-14
Tdn TELEGRAPH LEASE.
rrs OPERATION TEMPORARILY ENJOINED.

,,rc OpppATIOY TEMPORARILY ENJOlNED. !
A SUIT BEGUN DY JOSIAH c. REIFF IN BEHALF VI
HIMSELF AND OTHER STOCKHOLDERS
Josiah c. Reif obtained yesterday ron
ynaco Freedman in the supreme Court Chanoefs'a
Temporary Injunction restraining tle "eS'ei" 49, !
TELEGRAPH Company and its directors III" uno -
Union Telegraph Company nom caII''x -,
effect The proposed lease by tue "e0" ,
Ir cornauv OF the property and lines OF the utual
r,nton Comnony Mr. Reir brings his suit IN behaif OF
h,o,, "a n stakeholder of the Western Union company
and all other stockholders who Will come III anu on
trihute TO the expenses of the action inc temporal! IA
iunction is based verified complaint ana d" "iU
nv Mr. ReifT The accompanying order 10 sho" cause
hv the Injunction should not be continued is mace re
turnable on February 23 The undertaking gwen Ill oo
tanning the Injunction is in the sum OF $1O,OoO.
The complaint rectes that the plaintiff is the owner Oh
100 shares Of the stock Of the western UNION CoP'
and that he has been such owner Tor long umo Pi
70 the acts complained Of The Mutual Union company
was organized under laws of New-fork WIN capl
ta stock Of 5000 OOo which the directors aferWard e
pay attempted to increase TO $1OOOoOOO Inc MUTUAL
Union Company further issued SoOOooOo OIL ocnue III
mari ment the construction OF us nes anu ke
mortgage on It's property and franchises 10 secure INC
paymcnt of the bonds The company IL 10 aiegeu' hu
no legal power TO mortgage the property necessary 10
tbe exercise of its franchises and the mortgage 10 at
extent was Illegal The company had further no power
10 issue any evidences OF Indebtedness u q"
amount greater than three times HS cal"''i
stock and therefore the issue of the bonds was as 10
81 400 900 Illegal It ia further alleged tDat inc S' e vi
SO of the capital stock OF the company anu Vi
tbc "a coo 600 of bonds c. Moore Co Tor lhe
construction Of the cOmpanys lines, was mere auu
Oh the shareholders and trick to make IL appear '
the capital stock was full paid stock, whereas Tue CUM
many neve- received any actual consideration TOT the
stock and bonds The complaint then reci'es
mo nroceediugs taken by the Acknowledgement
Gov te dissolution of the Mutual Union Company on ae
count Of attempt 10 increase lts capt sOer 10y
tered INTO between the officers of the western mon anu
the Mutua Union se 9r one f he ot Of The
lease beinr 10 give TO the Western Union company V0
pete control OF the affairs OF the Mutual Ohoi 'I
value the entire plant and Ines OF the nuSI 700 mn
annual sum to be paid ny the Western Union Ieegla5
Company amounts to a90nt "a r gT COMPANY and to
about m rer cent of the price for which large par Oh
the stock on inc o amman h9d ali the lines wch could
nv nossibility need. Tho directors alone OF lne
, western the OI i~ase in question great part
OF The lines OF the Mutual Union C@nPah cb ME- ME-
within the territory Of other otate' solo VI w. com,
Pennsylvania prohibited one comp ting 'oe2TSu
pany from acquiring the lines OF 6e Swef
by forfeiture of the lines of the Onendl9g SGs
mia had recently , begnn an to % obton a De.
the Western Union ConranE 10 on S"comnt Of IT'S
ATTEMPT TO acquire control Of the lines OF me ASI
Union Company and OF 0ther W. Union
tny ore therefore imperilled by the attempt
~ Ea nj The Western Union Company had tried
70 get certain stockholders TO assent TO inc tease III
20 have pretence of having complied VIII I'm bnT
mems of the statute and IN order u aVOld me
Of cali * general meeting OF the m az wc
The plaintiff therefore, demands ludgnassnI 'n hc
the Western Union COMPANY anu az the l1ss ~ the
eDoined from completing lh eds ", ~, ocr "a erehv
Mutual Company property rom DONG any uVt az az
ae w a 10 he ppoperty Of the Mutual Union Com
pany from making any payment IN eosu w ol' IIron
H. UVor1 q
company and the future from taking any steps 10 ae
quire any interest or controlln the properly OI @
The Daymen of any interest dividend upon inc STOCK
or bp%ds or Other OBLIGATIONS OF the Mutual Union
Sompony' The afHdavit OF Mr. Reif simply repeats In
another form the allegations OF the conlPsMM paig
sIerpe and Thompson are the attorneys TOT MI Iein
WHAT THE PARTIES To THE SUIT SAY
Oaieers OF both the Western Union and the Mutual
Union Companies said yesterday that formal delivery OF
the property Of the Mutual Union to the western on
under the terms of the lease had been maze long Deore
the service OF the papers in the 0uncuon SUIT Niuol
had already been issued they said that all the epoyeS
of the Mutual Union should report directly to the west
,ro Union Tie lease had been approved Dy the
stockholders Of both companies ana IL h"u oeen
completed by the formal transfer OF the properly
10 fbe control Of the Western Union Com
nonv It was said by a prominent officer OF this
company that the basis Of the compliant ~ tne h
ton sut was in no respect aelSn I Iai According to
me COMPLAINT the Western Union Company MAJ inc ieg
ses This Was said to be defect in tne complaint
because the company had OF course the rgt uhue
statutes 10 improve and enlarge its elegTapDic
On the other hand, Josiah C. Relh me Gonpian' ~
eaJ that the injunction had been granted before the
lease had been carried into practical eject Dut t II
the paners had not been served before the prop
erty had been delivered the fact ,,a w0u 10
moi affect the question OF the validity Ol
fbe lease He declared that the lease wasa direct Voa
ZION OF the law 1870 under which he assumed that
had been made aud that the delivery OF the Mutua
Unions property could not be made because III
vaus for instance the delivery itself lnvov vow t"
stockhoder had the clear right to object 70 the easS
cause honsent of the stockholders had been obtained
surreptitiOusy.