New-York tribune., 1919-02-14
Stockholders
Ask Receiver
For New Haven
Minority Committee Seeks
to Bring $15O,OOO,OOO
Suit to Trial at Once


renewed their efforts yesterday to re-
cover damages alleged to be due them
as the result of the acts of former
directors in approving the acquisition
of other properties in New England
Harold Norris, as secretary and mem
hers of stockholders committee, made
application before Judge John c. Knox
Of the United States District Court for
the appointment of a "limted" receiver
for the company. Over 1,7OO stock
holders holding nearly $4,000 shares
joined in the application. The com
mttee, which stated that it had been
assured of the support Of 1882 stock
holders, in addition to Mr Norris, in
c!udes George P. Drury, James f.
Young, Joseph Engle and Edward Car
Lcntier.
Sovency Not an Issue
The plaintiffs, who are represented
by Saul S. Myers, of 60 Wall Street,
and ex-senator Edgar T. Bracket, of
Saratoga, explained that the action
against the New Haven is not to be
construed as an application which in
wolves either the solvency or insol-
'vency of the road They ask that a
receiver be appointed to bring to trial
at once the suit which was started
nearly two years and a half ago bv
former United States Attorney H. A.
Wise on behalf of Edwin Adams and
other stockholders against former di-
rectors of the company to recover
$150,000,000 alleged to have been lost
by reason of the attempts Of those di-
rectors to amalgamate various trolley
and steamboat lines in violation of
the provisions of the Sherman anti
trust law. This was known as the
Adams vs.. Rockefeller suit
Those named as "conspirators" in
the present action are William Rookie
feller, the executors Of J. P Morgan
George Macculloch Miller, Charles r.
Brooker, Charles S. Mellen-estate of
Hamilton Mex. Twombly, Robert w.
Taft, Edward D. Robbins, James s.
Elton, James S. Hemingway, Frederick
F. Brewster, Henry K. McHarg, Charles
NJ Pratt and John L. Billiard. These
men held Office at different times be-
tween 1890 and 1914.
Grounds of Application
The chief grounds urged by the ap-
plicants for the appointment of
"lmited" receiver are as follows:
1.-The stockholders in the Adams
vs.. Rockefeller suit have found the
prosecution of that suit at their own
expense to be so burdensome as to be
practically impossible.
2.-The Adams VS.. Rockefeller suit
is not brought against all the former
directors, but only against the estate
of ]. P. Morgan, William Rockefeller,
Lewis Cass Ledyard, Charles NJ. Pratt
and the estate of Hamilton Mex.
Twombly.
3-The Adams vs.. Rockefeller suit
does not seek to cancel the West
chester guarantee of nearly $2O,00O,-
900 on which the road is now paying
S800,O00 a year interest and similar
guarantees.
4-Such an important suit should
not be allowed to remain in the hands
of small group of stockholders who
may find it to their advantage to make
separate settlement and it would
then be too late for other stockhold-
ers to start fresh suit.
5-The receiver, being wholly dis
interested, would, as an officer of the
court, be given freer access to the
books Of the road than could possibly
be accorded to any small group of
stockholders.
6--Such suit, being Of enormous
size and scope, could only be prose-
cuted with continuity of purpose, un-
ity of action, and impartialitv by
receiver appointed and directed by the
court.
Diversion of Funds Alleged
The bill of complaint filed by the at
torneys for the stockholders committee
alleged that in 1893 the New Haven
company had secured practical control
of the steam, trolley and steamboat
lines operating in New England 1t was
further alleged that prior to 1898 Will
lam Rockefeller, the late J. P. Morgan
and George Maeculloch Miller "unlaw-
fully combined to restrain and monop-
ollze the railroad lines and business of
New England through the domination
Of the board of directors" Further
allegations were that the funds of the
New Haven were diverted and msap-
piled for the purpose of corruptly in
fluencing Legislative bodies in New Eng
land and in New York
The bill gave the names of all the
various lines that ultimately comprised
the New Haven system, including the
steamboat lines which have figured
prominently in New Haven litigation
in recent years. A description of the
trolley lines which were acquired to
protect the steam railroads from com
petition and the names of the directors
who figured in the so-called conspiracy
trial three years ago also were given
Judge Knox flied an order directing
the New Haven to show cause on Feb
ruary II at 10:30 a. IN. why temporary
receivers should not be appointed for
the road.
No mention was made in the pill of
complaint of the fact that at present
the Federal government is in control
of the railroads Of the country The
New Haven, as private corporation.
is the only defendant named
Niles.B.ment-Pond Report
~ fe