New-York tribune., 1903-04-02

The allegations made by Talbot J. Taylor and
James B. Taylor in the injunction proceedings
recently instituted by them against the South
ern Pacific Company and the Union Pacific Rail-
road Company are squarely contradicted in a
series of affidavits by President E. II. Harrf-
man and other official representatives of the
Southern Pacific Company made public here
yesterday afternoon Immediately after those
affidavits and the answer of the Southern Pa
cifo Company which they accompanied, had
been fled in the United States Court at Nash
VILE. The principal affidavit is that of Mr. Har-
riman and In it ne makes what may be fairly
called sensational statements as to alleged ef-
forts of James r. Keene to induce the Southern
Pacific interests to cooperate with him in
| stock market operations. to threats alleged
to have been made by associates Of MI. Keene
that they would make trouble for the Southern
Pacific interests unless the latter would agree to
make settlement with them in some way, as
TO an alleged offer from Mr.. Keene 10 sell the
pool shares at about 20 and Mr.. Keenes own
shares at about 7S and to the part played
in the whole matter by David Lamar and Ed
ward Lauterbach. Supplementing his affidavit
Mr.. Hartman said yesterday afternoon All
statements to the contrary Notwithstanding,
every facility has been granted on request for
| inspection of the Southern Pacific stock books.
and any failure to obtain necessary information
/ either
efficiency"
In the affidavit Mr. Hartman takes up first
the alegations of the compIainants that the
policy of the present management of the South
ern Pacific Company is prejudicial TO the inter
ests of the company, saying in part:
1T is wholly untrue that any transfer of the
I lease of the Central Pacific Railroad any
severance of it's relations with the Southern
Pacific Company has ever been considered or
contemplated. 1t is wholly untrue that the az
fairs of the Southern Pacific company nave been
managed or administered. or it's financial or
other policies controlled by the Union Pacific
Railroad Company in any other than the
true interests of the Southern Pacific Company.
II is wholly untrue that any part of the proper
ties Of the Southern Pacific Company have been
unduly favored respects the routing of trafhc
or the making OF betterments ard improve
nents with a view to any interest or IN pursu-
arce of any design or purpose OF the Union Pa
cifc Railroad Company or otherwise. that
there has been Intentional or actual dispropor-
ton. as between any portions of the Southern
Pacific system in the application of money to
,,ae+ ,ooderp requirements of economical asld
efficient operation.
Coming down TO a consideration OF the mo-
tives which he conceives actuated the bringing
of the pending suit, Mr.. Hartman gives upon
oa th this interesting recital;
II am informed and believe that TINS SUIT was
instituted because of the failure OF specu-
lative pool in the stock of the Southern Paclnc
corpany to induce the management or that
company to adopt financial policies "h1ch tne
manager of said pool believed woulo prouucs
+,,,norarv conditions as to market price OF the
stock enabling a profitable liquidation of the
noors speculative holdings, although such poll
,;oe ,,,ould have been contrary to the true ana
nermanent interests of the company ana OF lts
bona fide stockholders and because oil faliure
Of attempts to compel the purchase oy tne
Union Pacific Railroad Company OF the Poois
holdings and of the individual holdings OF It's
manager In this connection l state the iolio"
ing facts:
THE VISIT OF DAVID LAMAR
"One evening in the autumn OF l9ol' Eu"atD
auterbach called at my house on the 'eie-
,,,o and stated that friend of his had iilal-