Los Angeles herald., 1892-11-12
MORE CABLE ROAD LITIGATION,
Chicago People Who Want Cal
ifornians to Ante Up.
A Case Which Is Notable for the
Legal Talent Engaged.
Proceedings In the Various Tribunals
Yesterday- Court Notes--Mar-
riage Licenses-New
Suits Filed.

The trial began before Judge Var
Dyke yesterday of an important case
brought to test the liability of Californis
stockholders of the Pacific Railway
company of this city for indebtedness
contracted in Illinois.
The case is brought by the Northwest
ern National bank of Chicago against
William Alvord, president of the Bank
of California, and number of other
stockholders residing in this state to
attempt to find them liable for their pro
rata share of 100000 borrowed by the
company from the bank.
It is distinct from the foreclosure pro.
ceedings now pending and has brought
together an imposing array of legal tai.
ent. When the case was called yester-
day afternoon counsel were ranged
along the long table in front of the
judges bench, with an immense dis
play of documents to be used in the
trial. The plaintiff was represented by
Edwin Walker of Chicago, of much
prominence in the worlds fair commits.
sion and general solicitor OF the Chicago,
Milwaukee and st. Paul railroad, Allen
~ OOhIOy dbu w. 0dIuIuCT vi bllb
city. Mr.. Alvord was represented by T.
u. Brakeman of San francisco, who is
general attorney of the Pacific Rolling
mills, and the other defendants by
Chapman & Hendricks and John D.
Bicknell of this city.
The case presents some very fins
points for calculation, owing to the diff
ference in the Illinois and California
statutes. In the former state stock
holders in a corporation are not liable
for its debts when the stock is paid up,
while in California they are liable for
their pro rata share.
The complaint alleges that the bank
is corporation organized under the
laws of Illinois and doing business in
Chicago, and that the Pacific Railway
company was also organized under the
laws OF Illinois, to construct, operate
and maintain.a cable railway in Los An
geles.
Between September /, 1889, and July
%, 1890, the defendants were stockhold-
ers in the company, whose capital stock
was $4,000 shares, all issued to them.
The company borrowed 100000 from
the bank to be used in the maintenance
OF the road, and gave promissory note
for the loan. AS renewal of the note
another note was executed July 81,
1890, the company depositing as collat-
eral security ITO of its fret mortgage
bonds of the denomination of $1,000
each, and President G. B. Holmes gave
general authorization for tie sale of
the securities in event of non-payment
of the note.
The plaintiff alleges that no part OF
the note has been paid, that the money
was used in the building of the line, and
asks judgment against the defendants for
the court to ascertain the pro rata
amounts due by them and give judg-
ment accordingly.
In their answer the defendants enter
general denial of the allegations made.
They aver that the Pacific Railway COM
psny was organized under the laws of
Illinois, and that by the laws of that
state, when the par value of that stock
has been paid, the stockholders are not
liable to the corporation or to any
creditor thereof.
They claim that prior to the time the
plaintiff became the creditor Of the COM
pany and the making OF the note all the
capital stock OF the company had been
paid and certificates Issued and that
the plaintiff had full knowledge of the
fact.
Mr.. Alvord makes a separate answer,
following very closely the answer of the
other defendants.
The afternoon was occupied by the
plaintiff in the introduction of docu-
mentary evidence to substantiate their
allegations, and many technical points
arose between counsel.
The case will probably occupy day
or two in it's trial.