New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-01-25
UNION PACIFIC CREDIT MoBlLIER.
UNION PACIFIC AND CREDIT MOBILIER.

UNION PACIFIC AND CREDIT MOBILIER.
ARGUING MOTION TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT
RECENTLY TAKEN BY THE RAILWAY
Justice Daniels, yesterday, in the Supreme
Court Chambers, listened to arguments q motion
to ope Judgment taken recently by default by the
Union Pacific Railway Company against the Credit
Mobilier OF America for about $l,300,0OO.
George B. Belts appeared for the motion and
John f. Dillon and A. II. Holmes for the railway com
pany. The motion based on q petition
made by Oliver Ames stockholder OF the Credit MO-
ber AND of the viii Of his late fstheroakes
Ames upon the petition of eight other shareholders
of the Credit Mobcr 1t recitcd in the petition that
the Union Pacific Railway Company owns 224o2 shares
OF the stock and that the petitioners own or represent
all the. rest Of the shares, amounting to 1905.
The snlt In which the judgment rendered was begun
by service OF and complaint on Jay Gould
the president OF the Credit Mobern October 1882 The
petitioners had notice of the beginning OF the' suit
When they OF the suit they directed Mr. Gould to
take steps have the Judgment taken by default opened
Mt Gould said that the claim upon which the suit had
been brought valid and just and he refused 10
act in the matter Mr. Ames asserts that the claim was
not valid one and that 1t barred by the Statute of
Limitations The Judgment it is said was obtained by
couson and the object in getting IL was 10 use It as
se,on against any Judgments which might DO obtained
AGAINST the plaintiff In the suits In Massachusetts and
Pennsylva nia now pending.
Mr. Holmes in opposition to the motion, said that the
petitioners had legal capacity 10 derend the scuon,
which was directed solely against tho corporation of
which they we're stockholders. He also read an am
dayIt made in the interest Of the railway company In
which IL was denied that the company has the control
Of the Credit Mober. The suit In Massachusetts, had
no connection whatever with the present suit IL was
not true that Jay Gould had sucan In the Union
Pacific Company az make him hostile 10 the Credit
Mober. IL was also oenicd that the Judgment IN tms
case was obtained by colusion Henry =: crane IN an
anidavit read by Mr. Holmes, says thst ne mas nsa
charge of the books ana business OF the trustees
the Oakes Ames contract since IL was Inaae ~ iool
The accounts In ths suit not connected WIFE, anu
were not included in, the matters upon Wmen
the suits In Massachusetts, and PennsyNanIs
are based The amount for when INC
Judgment obtained justly due 10 tue
plaintiff Sidney Dillon the president OF the railway
Company affidavit declares that the Items SET iortn
ia the correct aud that the defendant was
Justly Indebted TO the company for the amount OF the
Judgment He also denies that the Judgment was pro-
cired by fraud or collision Jay Gould In an affidavit
admits that he president OF the Credit Mober aud
also a director Of the railway company. However,
he ala not now as much stock In the
railway company as he did once.
When the sit wac begun against the Credit Mober he
exnmned into the plaintiffs claim and satisfied himself
"a "a is tustjce The Credit Mobier had no available
and for he had not made any defence
TO the suit. $500 a.. 49, A. On. ,,s1
ment were opened the petitioners had no right or
authority TO como In and defend the scton' Inc