Year: 1877

Albert Havemcycr died in August 1874 He was
hvgey Interested in the shares OF tho Long Island
Railway Company, besides being trustee for other
owners OF the stock. Prior 10 hs DEATH as rs well
known, the management OF the company mainly
In the hands of tho late Oliver Charlick. william A.
Havemeyer and Horny o. Havcmcycr. administrators
OF Albert Havemeyer, who died intestste, brought
= SUIT little over year ago against
John G. Havcmeyer aud Henry Havcmcyer,
growing out OF tho ownership Of the stock OF the Long
Island Railroad Company They allege in their COM
plant that tho business OF the company badly
managed by Mr.. Charck to greatly dcpreciate tho
value of tho stock It hardly necessary to state that
this railroad, starting at Long Island City,
through the central part OF the island
toward its eastern extremity, connecting by
branches with various points either shore;
that there are two othcr railroad routes on Long
Island, both starting from Long Island City; that tho
general direction OF these such that one con.
sttules competing line to the northward OF the route
OF the Long Island Railroad, and tho other, a COM
peting line TO the southwark; that both competing
companies were controlled by Adoph Poppenhusen.
The history of the rivalship and subsequent efforts
to combine the control OF the competing roads
under one management have already been iuly pub
lishcd in the HERALD during the progress OF tho
pending litigation. Tho complaint IN tho present suit
recites in detail this history. The plaintins charge
that the manner In which the negotiations 1naly
closed with Mr. Poppenhusen lett them out In the cou


that they have thus been made heavy losers by tho
TRANSACTION that the defendants abused the trust and
confidence they placed IN them; that as soon
the defendants obtained control OF majority OF the
stock, exclusive OF the plaintins they used their posi-


mom 70 reduce iares upon inc eompanys railroad TO-


ing loss the outside stockholders and violating their
duty to run the railroad so as to yield the largest
return, and that by this action OF tho de-
icndants the control OF the company has
been transferred to Mr. Poppcnhusen that the
plaintiffs STOCK Is in minority OF the stock OF the
company, and It's market value has been made worth
not To exceed forty per cont OF Its par value
have been sold the defendants had not been guilty of
breach of trust. The plaintiffs claim that the de-
fendants have made themselves liable TO them Tor the
difference In the value OF the stock. which they
place at $4,000. The came up yes
isrday before Judge sedgwick. in tho Superior
OF an order Tor the examination Of John a. Havemeyc


There was motion made in the case yesterday before
Judge Sedgwlck, in the Supreme Court to discourage
an order for the examination. Among the papers
was certificate from DR.. Keyes hat he had made
careful professional examination for the purpose Of
estimating the ability OF Mr. Havemeyer 10 endure
such strain OF mental excitement He, the
DoS,0r Ds"s,r. says nc is suffering from nervous
fatigue and excitement Of any examination
involving tax upon his memory or mental


mentally or physically would produce injury winch
might be permanent There also certificate from
DR.. Nivis0n that he had long familiar with the
pnvsical and mental condition OF the defendant in
question, and mad professionally attended him since
his return from Florida, and he deemed his return
from Southern climate at this OF tho
year and In his present state OF prostration
well nigh suicidal; that in his opinion he
wholly unit to undergo any effort requiring mental
application or likely 10 cause him any fatigue; and
that a legal examination would be likely to result IN
paralysis further certificate pretty much to the
same ELECT was gwen by Dr. Allen. The motion wss
very strenuousiy opposed behalf OF the plaintiff by
Mr.. John E. Parsons and Mr.. J. H. Dougherty, who
contended that the sole purpose Of the motion
delay the trial OF the action and to the
tion OF the defendant Mr. Henry Scudder and Mr. c. f.
Mclean, with some warmth repudiated the impuation
OF want OF good faith the part of the defendants
and insisted that ne and they wiling
10 proceed with the examination and the action
they could without jeopardzing the life Tho
defendant The Court ordered that the defendant SUBJ
init to an examination by Dr.. Theodore q. Thomas,
who has 10 decide whether his distinguished profess
sona brethren their diagnosis OF the
case and TO direct the examination to proceed or 10
conduct partial one as ho may lit.