New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-09-26
SUIT AGAINST B. R. T.
f. F. MARQUAND SEEKS A WRIT OF MAN.
DAMUS TO SHOW THE BOOKS.
PRESIDENT ROSTER REJoINs THAT PROPER APP
PLICATION HAS not BEBN MADE
DECISION IS RESERVED.

DECISION Is RESERVED
Justice Garrctson in the Supreme Court yester-
day reserved decision In application for either
a percmpdory or an alternative writ Of mandarin,
made by George A. Lamb counsel for Frederick
f. Marquand to compel the Brooklyn Rapid Transit
Company to allow him 10 see the account. stock
and transfer books Of the company. lie is stock
holder in the company, and alleges that mention
Of unsatisfed judgments amounting 10 $l55sW had
been suppressed in the annual report Of the com
pany and that certain stocks OF the company
carried at par value had been acquired a. nominal
prices probably from / TO per cent OF their face
value
Mr. Lamb contended that the officials of he com.
pany would allow him 10 inspect the books -
as 10 learn the nature OF the lawsuits and to see
whatever compromises had been made The wyer
further alleged that the Of the company had
been misrepresented: that # had been msmanaged.
and that frequent change Of employees had caused
many accidents.
II the plaintiff finds any depreciation in ne stock
he intends 10 let the other stockholders know o.
and TO bring the case before the Attorney General
Ex-Lcutcnant Governor William T. Shecnsn. IN
behalf Of the company said that tho motion did
not state where the defendant Was 10 answer. HA
denied that the plaintiff was a stockholder AID
produced the stock book Of tho company for TIE
inspection Of the Plaintiff and his counsel Tie de-
clared that the Brooklyn Rapid Transit Company
was not railroad. that +, operated no railroad and
had nothing 10 do with their operation.
Mr.. Sheenan presented 10 the Court an affdavi.
Of President Clinton l.. Rooster who deposed tina,
Mr.. Marquand had never asked him 10 sea iha
books that demanded, and that when be hal
called at the companys office. I'm MontaguAst.. Ia
had been referred 10 tho frm Of Sheehan & Collin.
counsel for the company.
In stating the companys MI sheehsn said:
The companies could not include judgments. IN
. THAR H4fi az Ia
judgments arc reversed. The papers say that NJ.
Marquand is a banker. No one has discovered
where Mr.. Rossiter says that the plainuf IS p
Transit Company He may hold certificate o.
the Central Trust Company that after certain
date 50 much stock will he delivered 70 him. Iie
procured this. say, for improper purposes le
wrote A letter dated August % 70 President Ros-
sitter. asking about the judgments and other mat
tors ON The same night he sent the letter 70 Tho
sentence. After IT appeared IN that paper Mt Ros-
sitter received the letter The OBJECT WAS evident.
Was il for a honest purpose?
The publication shows some Interior motive. This
plaintiff was not connected with the reputable firm
Of Marquand & CO.
is the threat 10 take this matter before the A.
wound UP the utterance OF bona hde owner OK
tho stock?
M sheehan then paid his respects to Mr. Lamb.
a. follows:
The plaintiff alleges corruption. Young man, d.
! you know the men whom YOU assail- Rooster;
| Williams. Keeney. Jackson-al men who stand
! highest I'm this community? II. when your hair
has turned gray you have earned the respect which
is felt for these men in this county YOU may well
consider yourself a lucky man
| II was intnated by Mr. Sheehan that the sui,
had been brought I'm the OF stock jobber'
| This was Indignantly denied ny MT Lamp IN re-
serving decision, Justice Garretson consented TO a.
cept briefs.