New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-09-06
MISCELLAAEOUS RAILROAD NEWS
THE UNION PACIFIC BEATEN.
HISTORY OF TIL SUIT AGAINST ThE CREDIT MO-
BILlER

The UNION GAClfIC DEAi ~.
HISTORY OF TIL SUIT AGAINST ThE CREDIT MO-
BILIER
BOsTON, Sept. 5.-lhe full bench Of the
Supreme Court to-day dismissed with the suit of
the Union Pacinc Railroad Company against the Credi
Mobilier OF America. Toe been argued three
times before the Court. the last time being IN
March, when the Unon Paclhc was repre-
scented by Sydney Bartlett and the Credit Mob!Iier
by william G. Russell ana George Putnam. The amount
involved was III ,095.OO0-tne sum agreed upon as the
basis of the settlement OF accounts between the two
corporati0ns after Credit hobiiier had nnished
nuiIdug Inc road and a further oi s20sOO0 whicn
was subsequently found to be due the Credit Moblier.
When the enterprise projected which
led to the building OF the Union
Pacific Railroad contract for building
the frat 100 awarded TO Herbert NJ. HoIic. OF
New-YOrK, "A friend OF Thomas q. Durant, then Vice
President Of the Union Pacific Company As HoIe was
unable 10 carry ont the OF the contract ho made
an assignment OF 20 the Credit MOblier, OF
America which a corporation chartered III Pehnsyl-
vanla ana really a syndicate of capitalists
many Of Interested In the Union
Pacific roa and the unfinished tporuon
OF Hoxes work was completed by the Credit Mobilier,
as were also i46 miles additional Tue stockholders of
the Union Pacihc and OF tine Credit Mpblicr were SUD
stanay the same aud when the great project had been
completed the balance In favor OF the Credit Mobilier
winch was the subject OF controversy, was found by
clnuitteo consisting OF mr. bOFcfn-
,r.nt Director and Messrs. Dillon, Macy and Dun
Al aDout tnis time tue COmmOnw wealth OF Pennsyl Sania
brought suit against Credit MOber for Income tax
ered 10 be due aud IN the lower judgment
encrcd IN favor OF the Commonwealth The Credit Mo-
bler Appealed and Union Pacific Company as surety
for the MoDer. gave Ito note for 100000. aud
AFTER tle termination Of suit the note be ap
piled toward settling account between the Credi Mo
bier md the Union Pacific Company In 1873 orthe first
lime tue Union Pacdc Company, tnrodga its board OF
MANAGEMENT; contested the Clam OF ,nc Credit Mo0er
and alleged that tho rsina contract although purpor
ing to nave been by HoIie. really made In the
interest of Thomas T. Durant, and MS fraud made the
contract void
Another ground OF fraud charged that the esti-
mated cost per mile by tae engineer WHO
made the preliminary surveys was $4,000,
and that the contract price paid H0xe was
$4,000 Der mile In To this last proposition the
Credit Her says that aftrr the preliminary surveys
were made TIE consulting ,ngnecr Mr. Seymour, cane
grade % ic.t per mile, instead OF 81 ee as pre-
vodeiy agreed upon ana as this invlved mucn
larger cost, HUxies contract Of @oOOVO
uer mile Was based upon tnis change me
position taken by the Credit MObler was thai whatever
NAV nave bren original vice Of uOKo Dy nis cODheo-
tlo1 with Mr DAraB II was cared by tns proceeding
The spring Of 1868. when IOI'e assigned MS cOnct 10
tne Credit 9iOJiIer; All tns Uni"n racine halIWy
having accepted the same. was III IA" Douha py
tAe terms of she CONTRACT. pato "Ss aisS
ma no equitable standing IN this suit as tue only parties
" 40 were Inured secret Ownership OF tDc
contract we're holders OF 1900 shafes OF ne stock OF
the Union Pacinc Company ali o. wnien STOCK Mas suD