New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-08-21
RAILROAD INTERESTS.
THE RICHMOND TERMINAL CONTROVERSY.
REPLY OF THE CALHOUN BROTHERS TO THE
CHARGES OF THE ADVISORY COM
MrrrEE OF SEVENTEEN.

Il
management Of te Georgia Central Railroad oy inc
Richmond Terminal Committee Of seventeen fdV 'a'
houn yesterday said ..
aThe personnel Of the committee is quite Emporium
in determining what their real purposes arc i".'e
are some members Of 1t against whom kno" ho,"ns
and whom / feel sure have been misled. but ia's
number OF them have strong personal reasons LOT at
tempting TO withdraw public attention from inc rca'
causes which have produced the present dcpio'aoe
condition OF the Terminal Company. on the comp,ce
are Messrs Clyde Goadby and Maben compI'lhah's III
the bill to put the Richmond and Danvilie h"iio",
Company I'm the hands Of receivers, winch Pic''"'.'
Nes,rs Drexel Morgan & Co. from undertaking 'le
rec rganization OF the Terminal Company A"o'0 -
ais, John A. Rutherfurd, who. assuming 10 ACT as
vice president o, the Terminal Company although he
had never been elected by the Board of Directors u
that Office confessed Judgment in favor OF the receivers
of the Danvllle Company and Of Messrs CSuc al"
Maben although the Danville Company was H"Ec!
indebted TO the Terminal Company, ana III P'sSoo'.o"
of assets OF tho par value OF over 100000 This
is the same gentleman who, when the Boau Vi
Directors had unanimously passed resolution l'sr''
ing the general counsel Of the company to postpone
the hearing for the appointment OF permanent receivers
signed an answer for the Danvlc Company, when hau
been drawn by the counsel Of Messrs Clyde Mabcn ana
(oadby without the knowledge OF the counsel OF thc
company. In the intervention OF John Bloodsoou'
which was filed at the hearing In Richmond w. VI
August 49, for the appointment OF permanent receivers
charges are made In detail against MessrS. 'Hue
Goadby, Maben, Huldekoper and Others. lhesc
charges show conclusivcly that the pre- eht
condition OF the Danville road is due to
leases which were made years ago by Messrs
Clyde Huidckoper and their associates, Snd by Me's
Naben GoaGby, stone Rutherfurd and their associates
This Intervention. owing to the fact that IL WIS o
read seems TO have escaped newspaper attention. phl
1t I. evident that Mr.. Clyde and his associates are
extremely anxious divert public attention from their
mIsdeeds This Intervention showed that on June
40 1891 the advances which had been made by the
Danve Company to the lines for the lenses OF which
Mcssrs CLYDE Stone, Maben Rutherford and Their
associates were responsible, exceeded So'"o"ooo'
These advances made prior to the lease oil tEe
Georgia Central road and did not include any OF the
alleged advances 10 that company. The Intervention
also showed that Mr.. Clyde his receiver. Mr. Huide-
kop-r and their associates, had converted income
bonds into fixed charges and had secured the guaranty
Of the Danvle Company upon the bonds OF the roads
they leased TO It, The loss on the Georgia Pacihc
Railway alone is certainly In OF 81 100000 In
view OF these facts and the near approach OF inc
stockholders meeting Of the Terminal Company u was
no doubt thought important by these gentlemen 70
mslead the stockholders OF the company, by dVerths
the attention Of the stockholders from the true causes
OF the present condition Of the company, and atrib
uting oil the losses to the acquisition Of the Georgia
Central As a matter OF fact Mr. Turner found the
Y
Danville loaded down with Improbable leases when
he assumed the presidency
What have yOu TO say In regard TO the charge tha'
the Terminal Board declined to carry out their promise
TO cooperate with the Norton committee aud have
practically abandoned their trusti
"In view OF the names signed to the report OF
the ADVISORY committee this charge Is quite humor-
os Among those signing the report OF the so-eallrh
advisory committee several directors who were
most active I'm overt Throwing the Norton committee
and who elected themselves and their friends direc-
tors OF the various railroad companies comprising
rhe Terminal system. Ny brother myself ana
Messrs Abram Hewitt and II. b. Plant. vigorously
opposed the action OF these gentlemen, ana 'her
high handed course last December forced me 10 re
xcn nv position as General southern Counsel.
because would neither defend nor carry out their
measures and to declare through thu public prints
TO the stockholders that the policy these gentlemen
were pursuing would wreck tier properties III"
advisory committee includes among It's members
M,.srs CLYDE Maben, Rutherfurd Strong and
Thomas, and they responsible for The fact that
the Board has stdicatcd It's trust In favor OF The
committee OF which these gentlemen are members
"Thc charge that the subcommittee have found
evidence that certain trustees Of the company have
prpntcd largely with their friends TO the extent OF
between 50 600 900 and 81 100000 By the purchase
Of the stock Of the Georgia Company purchased by
themselves from themselves and friends for your com
pany' is absolutely false. At the time OF this trans
sction / was not director Of either the Georgia
Company or the Terminal Company Ny brother was
n director OF the Terminal Company. but not OF the
Georgia Company. The majority Of those owning
the stock OF the Georgia Company conld not be
classed In any sense MS friends. They had taken
an active part IN contest for the con
troll OF the Terminal Company In the spring
OF 1888, and opposed both to Mr..
Inman. my brother aud myself. At the
meeting OF the Terminal directors at which this trade
was made both my brother and Mr. Inman declined
10 be present Earh wrote letter 10 the Board
stating that they owners OF Georgia Company
stock and for that reason would not take part In
the meeting where the purchase OF this stock was
10 be considered. The resolution In favor OF the
purchase OF this stock, am Informed WINS offered
ty Mr. George g. Scott and seconded by Mr.. George
f. Stone. IA member Of the advisory committee, and
OF the sub committee on feoranization.'
at Is stated, Mr.. CalhOnn. that You arc the
director referred TO in the statement that drafts for
large sums were made by director on the treasury
OF the Terminal Company
when became general Southern counsel for the
company / found II involved In serious litigation
and threatened by hostile legislation affecting lis
right 10 control the railroad systems whose stocks II
had bought For three years l engaged In almost
one uninterrupted conflict In defence OF the company.
During that time was compelled TO incur large eN-
penditurcs. but I never drew dollar from tho
company except for my salary and the legitimate eA-
penditurcs made IN the interest Of the company
aWhat about the claim for 900 your brother
presented for financial services rendered the Georgia
Central Railrad?'
"Thls also Is false When my brother returned
from Europe In the fall Of 1890 Immediately after
the Barring failure he found that the fiscal agents
Of the company had resigned, and that the Central
Railroad was carrying large hOating Indebtedness
lie was not a salaricd officer, but he was rlues'l
to assume the burden Of taking care OF It's ho"""7
debts. During the stringency following the Barhg
failure he took care OF the debts OF the company
and finally In November, 1891, made contract win
Mcssrs. spcyer Company by which they were iuhuel
for twelve months. lie stated TO the board OF
the Danvllle company, by whose assent aS lessee
OF Tho Central rond these NEGOTIATIONS cOndCtN,