The Marion daily mirror. (Marion, Ohio) 1892-1912, 1911-05-12


Are Hsld, W. a., lgstarss ~ q, NJ.
Hysms, plrsesef ok the xlEslnls
Rsllwsy---ohloAns Who Figure In
csss Have Seen Mere "Tools.-
Columbus, o.--(specisl.) .)-Thst the
injunction Sults pending in both state
and federal courts asapst the chesa'
peake q Ohio ownership OF the Hook!
ing Valley, which have been holding
up over $4,000. 900 Of improvements
on the Hooking Valley railway since
It's acquisition by the Hawlsy inter.
ests IN April. 1909, wero not brought
BY mon having any real interests At
stake. but instituted by an eastern
man, and that through all the devious
meanderinEs Of the proceedings may
be detected the hand Of Attorney n.
G. Morton Of Columbus, appears from
evidence in the proceedings now be-
ing heard In the United States court.
Godfrey NJ. HyAms OF Boston, q d.
rector Of ythsGVirginia Railway close
associate OF sthss lGt5 III. H. Rogers
Gad ;sthevJ STANDARD OIL men and with
mNch money Of HIS own tied np An
the virginia Railway, is the real
fOFee behind the sulk 1T developed
In thes tsstimony. that ,Shernsn. a
Sterling, q hrm Of, Wall strests Law,
yers, and sxecutoFs' OF the estate OF
u, H. Rogers, were connected. with
the. cBses, va So ~. = Sys ,JlN
igFrem tbs day in June, 1eoes when
Atterpey, sR. Z. westfall naades his
nrst appearance In the ,fsht> at the
annual meeting OF the stockholders Of
the X. a NJ, on down through the
hling Of suits in state courts, In the
purchase OF 100 shares OF Hooking
Valley stock at a price many points
sbove the market, on which a suit
was instituted in the federal courts,
and in the bringing Of a quo warranto
suit against the Hooking Valley by
the prosecutor OF Fairfield county. all
money for every purpose was furnish
cd by Mr.. Hyams.
when the c. n o. first began seek
Ing fer "a northern outlet a represen-
tatiye OF the FoadV went to Washing
ton To- consult FormerJ ATTORNEY Cen.
sral Ellis. who had . instituted the
nrstI quo warranto suits. against the
Hooking and' the II q o. c., and ask.
"a him, " he would ronsidsr the 1ac-
euisition Of the Hock.as or the T. q
o. c., sorl bot ? ass . violation Of Law,
Mr.g Eiflsssaid that he wotsld not. bni
instead would consider 1tha purchase
~ being . good thing for the state.
It.whs the frst intention OF tho O. a
D. to- purchase fboth eroads.g but the
Late Shore stepped In and demanded
A'division,. IT. took cths r. 40. g.,
and the two .eompanieU Jointly spur'
chased the K.t& M.4 eve sac
u Then came the suits by n. E.swest
fall. III. ID. n Manington 'andfsF. IL
sohosdIugsr. The suit nov, ,boins heard
10 brought on 100 sshares Of stock
which Mr.. cwsstfalll testiaed he pur-
chased on direction OF r. G. Morton,
paying 1140 q share for the stock.
The money TO pay for this stock was
given him In currency by Morton.
After securing the stock he sold 20
shares TO Warrington. 30 shares TO
Sehoedinger, fve shares each TO two
stenographeYs In his once and re-
tanned 40 shares for himself. West
fall said he received cash for the
stock sold, but had never made nor
been asked 20 make any accounting.
This wss eerTeborAted by Morton.
Nsninstou and 'IScboedinsers4 Me-.
Merton 4testihsd that he hsdgsactsd
for 1Byanss and hadlDrecetved from
him In Eali some $4,000 in the form
Of New Yopk. drafts witch he had at
ense eashed and -placsd in his strons
boa. From this box the money was
taken as ueadedsto pay, for. the stock
for court COSTS for stenosrapher fees
etc. aHA aid nats know just how mueh
oft he had paid sout,- as he had tep,
nos account and had not made.any &C
cnnntius 10. his principal nor taken
recsipts4 or evidences Of payment. L.
II developed that injunction eases
brought last fall in Fairfield county
by the prosecuting attorney Of that
county had been at the instance oi
Mr.. Morton. The petitions In thes,
cases were drawn in the law Offices
Of Arnold, Morton 4 Irvine and hat
been sent TO the prosecuting attor
nsy. who had brought them to Co
lumbus for signature by the attorne!
general, which was necessary. as th'
cases were brought in the name o
the state. M. A. DAusherty Of Lan
caster. who was 10 Asaist In the pros
peution Of these caser VS. employel
by Mr. Morton and had been pal'
about $500 for his services.
Mr.. Morton testified his fees hs,
been in addition 10 the $4,000 recsi1
ed for other expenses. Hyams ha
paidsthe expenses for the $4,000 bon
given in the,sults brought On the pre-
ferred stoqk.. WHICH we're, Dismissed
and .alea tor, the ,'75Sa0 bond ip tA
present suit ,.o's., 4. /,
Attorneys for the Hooking expee
| 70 prove that the real reason behind IN
4 Hyams suit u to enable the Boston ma
| 70 secure control ~ the 4. AM Inisre
| ease he would be In position TO force
II sale u both the X. A NJ. and the VirKinl
Il 20 the Lake shoTe, and thus get back 10
Il tia builders OF the Virginia Railway "A
Il vast amount Of money put into that road
which has not paid N,,os the beginnin