The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-06-15
SCORES VICTORY
 IN CONTEST WITH GRAY

taken any part in the deliberations of the higher body in the matter.
 The opinion handed down yesterday was on an appeal from the decision of the Montgomery City Court by the South and North Alabama Railroad Company. and on a cross appeal by Henry B. Gray ct als. It was on the complaints in the former appeal bear ing upon the injunction, that the de- cree of Judge Sayre was reversed and rendered. The features of the Judges decree on which the cross appeal was made. were affirmed.
 More Gases in Court.
 The history of- the Gray-Louisville & Nashville litigation covers period of nearly a year and a half In that time no less than five suits have been entered in various courts of Birming- ham and Montgomery, two of which, including the one to which the opinion of yesterday refers, are now in the Su- preme Court.
 Originally the litigation was begun in the Jefferson chancery Court Henry Gray. a stockholder Of the South ana cation to the directors of that road to file a bill in the Birmingham court. asking for an accounting from the Jouisyille & Nashville of its manage ment of she South and North since 1872 at whiea time the larger road took charge or the operation of the smaller. .The appointment of re- ceiver for the latter road was aiso asked for in the bill which the direc- tors of the South and North filed
 In May, 1905, MT. Gray entered a,milar suit, against the Louisville X Nashville Tn the Montgomery city Court in Equity in his own name as minority stockholder in the South and North, and in the name of other stock holders of the road. In the Dill nied in this suit, he asked for an injunction restraining the Jefferson Chancery Court from hearing the suit instituted at his instance by the directors or the North and South, advancing in support of his request that the directors or one ,oad were also directors in both, ano' ,berefore interested parties. He also .lleged that, the suit in the JeHerson County tribunal for the reason s.a. .s,S would be simulated suit. anu "- not be pushed in good faith
 After hearing the arguments. Judge sayre granted the injunction and the case was tried in the Montsomery court. The judge, however, refused 10 grant the request of MT. Gray to ap- noint A receiver during the course or litigation.
 At the conclusion of the suit In .ne lower court 1t was taken 10 the ou a, ractors of the South and North, ana on a cross appeal from the Gray Inter ests.
 Tn reversing the opinion of Judge Sayre and dissolving the ln1unc.lon' H. inc supreme Court held that the Jen- erson Chancery Court had Jurisdiction en tba suit instituted there. with mower to give the relief asked 1or' s,nce the suit was first filed there Tba ohieot. the opinion stated, in nav ino +ha action brought by the Boagd or Y,trectors in such cases Is merely to sat the machinery of the court Tn 'ac- tion. In case the insttgator oi the suit suspects lack of good faith on tne part of the directors Tn pusn ,n, .s, the suit. he should introduce piii III the the court where the suit was originally hroueht. alleging the application To the diractora to institute proceedings, as well as their refusal to do so, proouc-
 ing proof of his contention. ,,.
 Of the other suits brought In the llt- ieation. A suit of custer from It's con .so,ioS tbe South and North was de- oidad against the railroad by Judge sayre in the Montgomery City Court, Tn dacree rendered May Is. This case was appealed to the Supreme Court ana was continued until the next Novemoer term.
 Another suit was brought by Walter IT. Moore, a minority stoekholder oi the south and North. against the Lou fsville and Nashville, in the Montgom- cry City Court in Equity, asking for the appointment of a receiver for the smaller road. This suit was entered in the Equity Court on May 16, few minutes after the decree was given, ousting the Louisville and Nashville from its control of the South and North. This suit will be argued June 2S.