The morning news., 1892-03-29

curly 10 the DanvHie on account OF indebted
ness OF the Central paid by It, for which it claims
1t was not liable. should be turned over
to the receiver. The complainants cannot be
serious in such contention The settlement
and must be adjusted by final decree. The Cen
tral Trust Company has not been served nor has
1t appeared in this litigation. There Is no such
prayer In the bill. Assuredly no more need be
said upon this extraordinary request.
During the reading OF Capt. Jackson's
paper Judge Speer interrupted him and
took occasion TO call his attention to the
fact that according to the allegation as set
forth In the bill for the receiver, the situa-
tion was one OF extreme gravity and one
that called forth the promptest and most
deoirive action.
the conclusion Of Capt. Jackson's argu-
ment.
MAI. BACoN's ARGUMENT.
Maj. Bacon commenced his argument at
1:l0 o'clock. He spoke about an hour and
three-quarters. Hs endeavored TO econo-
mize in time as much as possible and not to
cover the ground already covered by his as
sociates. This compelled him to make only
a disjointed reference 10 the various points.
In opening his speech Maj. Bacon announced
that ne had no paper prepared OF his argu-
ment. expecting to cover the general points
and development. As a representative Of
except to preserve their interests. There
were some 80. 900 shares, he said, outside of
the AZ, 900 shares held by the trust company
and the holders OF these $4,000 shares we're
the ones most interested In the result Of the
litigation. The holders OF the AZ. 900 shares,
he said, had no interest in the road what
ever outside OF their voting power. There
were also Some S4,500, 900 debentures, the
holders OF which were interested in the re-
suit of the litigation. The fact that by
strenuous search only 5000 shares had been
found, the holders of which were opposed
Co the appointment Of a receiver, was
evidence. he said, that only that number Of
minority stockholders were opposed to
breaking the lease.
ILLEGALITY OF THE LEASE.
He submitted that It was not in the power
OF the Central to make the lease now OF the
Georgia Pacific, and that 1T was never the
design Of the original charter that the
Central should lease itself out. Mai. Bacon
discussed the question Of the powers con-
ferred upon the two roads by their chartsrs
at some length. He made a strong argu-
ment on the question Of competition be-
tween the lines involved. "The courts deal
with things as they are. " be said, land not as
they may be made fictitiously to appear,
not that there is competition technically be-
tween the Central and the Georgia Pacific
duO buC INiCuAuOuO Akiu OduNlAlos DUL bUhL IL
Is part of a general scheme to defeat COM
petition" He compared the situation to a
chess board with the roads involved as
pawns, and the other figures
moved at will by the players,
the Richmond Terminal, which stand in
the back ground. Maj. Bacon laid great
stress on the fact that the Richmond and
Danville board consists of thirteen men,
bers, of which nine are members of the
TaPr1 1FlaI hn ard IN Goarcr{a An a~J
OF ten members, of which seven are mem
bers of the Terminal board, and the East
Tennessee board of fifteen members, Of
which nine are members Of the Terminal
board. All four of these corporations
might have their headquarter in the same
building in New York. he said, hold their
meetings in the same rooms and transact
business for all four roads without ad-
journing the meeting.
A CONSTITUTIONAL POINT.
An important constitutional point made
by Maj Bacon. but not stressed at great
length, was that the fact that competition
may be for points beyond tho limits of the
state does not relieve it from the scope of
the constitution. So long as competiti on
exists from points within the state, he said,
the state has power over it, The main
purpose of the bill. he said, was already
accomplished, the Richmond and Dauville
having thrown up the lease aud the counsel
having shown by their amendment their
willingness to accept this condition of af-
airs. The $4,000 snares, he said. was the
vital point. The question of the receiver
ship largely depended upon the action of
the court upon the prayer for the enjoin-
ing Of these a., 900 shares from voting. The
holding Of the shares, he said, was illegal
and vioative Of the constitution. They
were held not simply TO control the road
=
road. He said that 1t could not be possible
for the road to be kept in good condition
when the forces engaged in its preservation
were reduced from 80 to 65 per cent. This
was evidence of au intention to wreck the
road.
THE FAIL LING OFF IN COTTON.
He instanced the statements of last sea-
son, showing that competition had been
killed and traffic diverted from the Central.
He showed that lasr season the Central oar
ried seventy bales of cotton out OF Atlanta,
while the East Tennessee carried over 2, 900,
O large part going in the direction Of Sa-
vannab, and these seventy bales were car
ried cut by the Atlanta and West Point
and delivered TO the Central at Newman
At Columbus the East Tennessee carried
out more cotton than the Central, though
the East Tennessee has no line there
At Montgomery the Central carried 10,8s7
Ddl65 anu Luc Edsb Ao1u6Ssc0 O0, oS1, anu tne
East Tennessee has no line at Montgomery.
At Opalika the East Tennessee has no road
and every road there is controlled by the
Central, yet the East Tennessee carried out
5000 bales and the Central 1000 At Rome,
where the two lines are on an equal footing,
the Central carried out $50 and the East
Tennessee 912. At Selma, Ala, both have
lines. The Central took out 750 and East
Tennessee 25, ,567, 1863 going to Savannah
and 5000 and over to Charleston.
SCHEME TO WRECK.
Maj. Bacon dwelt on these facts as show
ing deliberate design on the part of the
Terminal company to run down the Cen
tral. "The parties who hold the $4,000
shares OF stock own nothing but the voting
power of the stock" he said. "They haven't
s., 900 worth of interest in IT, They have
issued bonds on the stock OF the Georgia
company and sold them and received their
money" Maj Bacon contended that
il the purposes Of the litigation
were to be accomplished a recsIver-
ship was necessary. The Richmond
aud Danville could pass a resolution taking
the lease back. IL the present board would
not subserve their interests they could elect
another board who would serve their pur.
pose There is TO be an accounting and
with subservient board there is nothing TO
prevent them taking the Central securities
and debating their own settlement He
said that IL the old set OF directors would
not obey their behests they could elect an
other. He contended that the Central is a
solvent company and they were asking a
receiver. not because the property is insol-
want hue IN reafs,la "A Folveuf nrorartv