The Birmingham age-herald., 1907-10-02
JOIine and Robinson Take
 Charge of Metropolitan
ATTORNEY FILES CHARGES
Say the Management of Two Com panies Have Wasted $3,5o0,0oO and Failed to Account
 for $4,395,6 ,6s7.

New York, October 1.-Startling charges of outrageous and the neglectfu manage ment. or if not that, failure to account for millions of dollars are made by State Attorney General Jackson in a petition filed today calling for the appointment of receivers for the New York City Rail way company and the Metropolitan Street Railway company, and also demanding the dissolution of the New, York City Railway company.
 The application for receivers was made to Justice Ford of the supreme court. who issued an order for the defendants to appear in court on October 3 and answer to the complaint.
 The Attorney Generals action further complicates a situation already consider ably entangled by reason of the various inter-related corporations which control and operate the traction lines of Manhat- tan island.
 Adrian H. Jolne and Douglass Robin son were appointed receivers for the New York Railway company by Judge La combe in the federal court several days ago, and today the same receivers were named in the same court on applica ton of the company's attorneys to act tor the Metropolitan Street Railway company
 
 leased the lines for the Metropolitan Street Railway company under a guar antee to pay : per cent dividends on the Metropolitan stock. This dividend has never been earned since the date of the lease and the Attorney General charges that the deficit to date amounts to more than $l0000,000.
 The Attorney General declares also that the lnterborough Metropolitan company, which absorbed the New York City Rail- way company in 1906. assumed all obliga- lions of the NeS York City Railway com pany, and he set forth that the New York City Railway company and it's directors have taken no steps to force the Inter borough Metropolitan to carry out it's obligations.
 Hints at Frauds.
 The allegations limiting at frauds are made in connection with the companys s . construction account the most sensational being that charge of S509,900 per mile was made for the rebuilding of certain surface lines Attorney General Jackson alleges that the appointment of the re- ceiyers for the New York City Railway company by Judge Lacombe in the United States circuit court was illegal, and de- mands that the defendants be directed to pay back all money and the value of all property which was lost and wasted by or through them"
 The defendants named are: Daniel B. Hasbrouck, De Cliffod Morehead, Her bert Vreeland, Richard w. Mead, Robert A c. Smith, Charles E. Warren, William Fahnstock. Solomon Guggenheim, Ralph l.. Anderson, Jr., and the Metropolitan Street Railway company.
 The Attorney General declares that tie New York City Railway company. the lesee of the Metropolitan Street Railway company, became insolVent shortly after the execution of the lease of the Metro politan Street Railway company under the 2 per cent guarantee, and has con tinued to be insolveut ever since. The liabilities of the New York City Railway company are stated to exceed its assets by $1G,000 GOO.
 Continuing the Attorney General says That the defendants have unlaWfully disposed of assets and property of the defendant company that during the year 1902 defendants expended claimed to have expended S1,2S4.3Uy for engineering and experimenting expenses in changing motive power on less than 4S miles of double track road, this being at the rate of $30,000 per mile: that if such money was expended for any such purpose the defendants were negligent and wasted the funds in expendlng much more than a reasonable amount for such purpose, and if said money was not expended for such purposes, tlle tAptHuilule lidS never DttH accounted for by the defendants; that during the year 1902 the defendants claim 10 have expended on the property of the deIendants company the sum of s4, 4,395,6S7 for laying new rails; this being equivalent to the rate of over $103.oo0 a mile. whereas the true cost and laying of such rails could not have exceeded the sum of s22.000 d mile: that if said aum as stated was actually expended for that purpose de- fendant wasted almost 8 500, 900 of the as- sets of the defendant company, and if l.e said money was not so expended then the defendants have not accounted for d sum amounting to $4.395ss