The morning news., 1892-03-15

Cunningham Is a very full legal document.
of which the following synopsis is made:
The answer first shows that the bill should
be dismissed for ten different reasons, OF
which the ohief reasons are because the
Central Railroad and Banking Company.
the lease 10 the Georgia Pacific Railway
Company because the plaintiff, Mrs. Clarke,
has participated In the last dividend; be-
cause the Central Railroad and Banking
Company Is the only party having the
right to complain of the illegality Of the
lease; because no necessity Is shown for the
appointment OF 9 receiver. even IL the
allegations of fact and law set out in the
bill are true; because under the bill of the
complainant full relief cannot be
granted; because tbe Ocean Steamship
Company, the New England and
Savannah Steamship Company and
the Savannah and Western Railway Com
pany, the Montgomery and Eufaula Rail-
way Company, and the Savannah and At
lantic Railway Company are not parties to
the bill; because this court is wit lout
jurisdiction In the premises, and because
under the law it is matter between the
state Of Georgia, which created the corpora
tion, and the corporation itself. A state
ment is then made as 20 the facts in the case
and the lines owned, leased ami controlled
by the Central railroad company. The
third section of the answer admits in a gen.
eral way the major part of the allegations
of the bill as to the lines, property and
business conducted by the Richmond and
Danville railway and Richmond Terminal
Railway and Warehouse Company 80 far
as their knowledge goes.
COMPETITION DENIED.
It says that the Richmond and Danville
touches the Central railway at only two
points in Georgla-Atlanta and Augusta; !;
that the Richmond and Danville does not
compete with the Central for any business
between any points In Georgia. The sixth
item Of this section denies that the Rich
mond and Danville and West Point Termi-
nal Railway and Warehouse Company con-
trols by stock, ownership or otherwise the
lines composing the East Tennessee, Vir-
ginia and Georgia railway system as set
forth in the sixth section of the bill, and al
leges that the East Tennessee. Virginia and
Georgia is an independent corporation
controlled by its own board Of directors,
and that majority Of the stock Of this
company is not owned or controlled by the
TermiL al company, and that the East Ten
nessee was. at the time Of the lease. and is
now, an active competitor with the Rich
mond and Danville railway and with the
Central railroad for state and interstate
business.
The seventh, eighth, ninth and tenth
items Of this section admit the facts alleged
as to the leases of the Georgia Pacific, the
Richmond and Danville and the Central
companies and the officials of the Central.
The eleventh item admits that the Central
aud the Richmond and Danville and their
controlled lines are competitors with each
other TO certain extent for interstate BUSH
ness, but not for business within the state.
THE EAST TENNESSEE A COMPETITOR.
The twelfth item admits that.the Central
and the East Tennessee are competitors for
business in the state, and that the competi-
tion between these companies Is sharp, and
that the competitive business Is competed for
by both companies, and that this competi-
tion is in no way controlled by the Rich-
mond and Danville or the Termi-
nal company. and that the Cen
trail aud East Tennessee shave
distinct officers and agents at all points in
the state and elsewhere who compete and
strive for the business at their respective
points; that there is no competition between
tine Richmond and Danvills and the Gem
tral between Rome and Savannah, or Rome
and Brunswick, or Rome and Macon, or
Rome and Albany, or between Atlanta
and Savannah, or between Atlanta and
Brunswick, or between Atlanta and ALI
bany, or between Atlanta and Macon, or
Macon aud Brunswick, or between Macon
and Athens, or between Macon and Gaines
vile, or between any other points In the
state OF Georgia. None of these points are
reached by business, but not for the
Richmond and Danville and its
operated and leased lines and by
the lines Of the Central. There is strong
competition, says the answer, made by the
East tennessee running a competitive line
to that of the Richmond and Danville and
the Centrars lines, the said East Tennessee
being in nowise connected with or controlled
by said companies. "This defendant" says
the answer, says that whether said bill is
collusive OF not it does not know, but it re-
spectfully suggests that is impossible for the
solicitor of the complainant IN said bill. who
has sworn positively to the truth of the allie
cations therein contained, to know whether
said bill is collusive one or not, and.
therefore, this defendant says that said
averment OF said bill is not collusive one,
should be treated as an averment not sworn
to by the complainant, and therefore as not
proved as 1t should be under the rules OF
this count" This is point on Mr.. Roun-
tree
STATUS OF THE GEORGIA ROAD.
The thirteenth item denies that the Rich
mond and Danville, through its control of
the Central, has control Of all the competing
lines between Macon and Athens, alleging
that competition with the Georgia railroad
still exists, the latter road being controlled
entirely by board of managers appointed
by the Louisville and Nashville aud the
Central, who have always managed 1t
entirely and without any reference to the
wishes or desires Of the Central; that the
said Georgia railroad is entirely independ-
ent Of both the Richmond and Danville and
Central and is In nowise controlled by
either.
The fourteenth item denies any knowl-
edge whatever Of the formation OF the
Georgia company, but believes and alleges
that when the 1000 shares of Central was
acquired by the Georgia company there
was no connection whatever between it and
the Terminal company, and that the latter
had no interest in, and was In no wise con
nected with the Georgia company until the
latter part of the year 1888, when the stock
holders of the Georgia company sold their
stock in 1t to persons In the interest of the
Terminal company. "And this defendant,
further answering, denies that the Rich-
mond and West Point Terminal Railway
and Warehouse Company controls ma
jority of the stocks OF the Eest Tennessee,
Virginia and Georgia Railway Company or
control said company" It 10 denied that
and encourage monopoly. and AYERS that
the lease made June 1. 1891, between the
Central Railroad and Banking Company
and the Georgia Pacific is a legal and proper
lease in every respect, and that to declare
the lease void would be TO infiict a great
loss upon the stockholders and TO destroy,
perhaps, q valuable property 70 its owners.
RIGHTS CT THE CENTRAL.
The ifkaanth ffar,. "A ay,affe n, - tha Cs.,t.af