Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1886-02-04
THE G., $. & ST. Il.
why Two Boards OF Directors and omcers
Were Chosen.

Were Chosen.
TO the Editor OF the Gazette
LoNGvIEw, TEN, Feb. ..
The attention OF your correspond
ent has been called (by the gen
tlemen composing the board Of direct
ors and officers elected by them
in opposition to the board and officers
elected by Brad Barner at the annual
meeting OF the stockholders of the Gal
weston, Sabine & St. Louis railway held
at their office in this city on the 10th ult.,
a brief report OF which, with no leaning
toward either side, and which was at the
time satisfactory to both parties, was
sent THE GAZETTE the next day by the
regular correspondents of that paper
here 20 one-sided special from here to
THE GAZETTE, sent by Mr.. Barner or
some one In his interest, which, IN your
correspondents opinion, Is very like an
unjust use of your correspondent name,
as it Is well known who he is, and every
special from Longview is laid to his
charge. On account Of his attention hav-
ing been called to the special, he asks
that statement of facts be given him, so
that, as an ex parte statement had been
made by Mr.. Barner, through your col
umns the side that feels aggrieyed might
also have n hearing. The matter is of
great interest to many, and has made
its way into all the great dailies
and especially has been widely published
entefpi1ees oqlffssisi o Sii5W was given
your correspondent in answer To his
question; Why were there two boards of
directors and two sets OF officers for the
Galveston Sabine & st. Louis hallway
| company-each declared illegal by the
otherF The answer ia given by vice.
President G. ID. Harrison, and the holder
OF the proxies, A. S. Taylor Esq. The
cause In brief is as follows: At the meet
ing OF the stockholders above mentioned,
a > Taylor, holding proxies from G. &
NJ. l.. construction compSny to vote their
STOCK TO the amount of 1920 shares (the
same being majority Of all the stockl.
Brad Barner being IN the chair, ruled
that said proxies would not be allowed.
ana asserted that he would vote the en-
tire stock himself, although he admitted
mat he had not earned the stock, but that
lhe construction company had earned IL.
lie thereupon nominated ticket (as did
also the opposition), and claimed the
right to vote the stock controlled by Tav-
lor, and declared his board of directors
elected. The opposition appealed from
his rulings to the stockholders present
and his decisions were reversed, and the
ticket nominated by TAYLOR was de.
clared fairly and legally elected
10y majority Of 5Gi vot4s
The construction company whose proxies
were held and voted by TAYLOR is the as
slgnee OF contract wherein it is proyid.
ed that IL shall receive as compensation
Tor the construction of the road $40 On0
OF stock per mile of completed road. az
well as certain bonds. The engineer ~
the company made a certificate certifying
10 the TACT that twenty-one miles of road
had been completed, and under that GER
uncate bonds were issued to the amount
OF $4,000 per mile for the twenty-one
mics, and, as matter OF course the
company was then entitled 10 The fnI,
amount OF stock for the twenty -one miles
at Sts,oUo per mile, or 2520 shares.
an OF these Facts Mr. Barner well knew
ana ADMITTED TO be true, yet he fails to
snow any valid reason why said stock
shou4d not be represented in the afore. |
SAID stockholders meeting, but arbi.ro- !
my attempted 10 exclude said stockboid. |
ers IRON any participation therein |
Against this usurpation of authority the
opposition prot, sted, as natter of RIGHT
ana proceeded TO vote majority OF the
STOCK, with the results above stated
rms IN why there are two boards az Al
rectors and two sets of officers Of tho !.
galveston, Sabine and ST. Louis R.iIyay
company, or rather this accounts fsf the
existence OF Que legal board w,sh MIR
bnrand as president, and one rsetended
board, headed by MIR. Barner
" w. Woop.