Year: 1874

The suits brought by the trustees and, from
time ,e by stockholders of the old Adams Express
Company have been SO fully reported in THE TRIBUNE
that brief history Of the origin Of litigation will
an Introduction to the conclusion OF the last OF the
suits In opinion rendered by Judge Barrett Of the
Supreme Court yesterday ON q motion made In the
Of Dinsmore ct al agt Adams OF al AT the break
ing out OF the civil war; the old Adams Express CON-
pany sold to Mr. Plant Che Southern portion Of their
business, nominaly for eo0oooO. but really for at
least 100000 and Plant reorgsnized the Southern busi
ness under the name Of tho Southern Express Company
After the close Of the war when the Adams Express
Company had been newly organized three OF the stock
holders, the Ensten Brothers, brought suit claiming
that the transfer OF the Southern business 10 Plant
merely nominal. and intended to protect the property,
and that the assets OF the Southern portion ought TO
be included In the distribution OF assets to the stock
holders OF the old Adams Express Company. Tho
trustees OF the old Adams Express Company contested
the claim, and it was compromised After this, the
trustees Of the old company resolving to prevent sim


liar suits. brought what Ia termed "an omnibus suit
against oil the Stockholders Of the old company to
pei an accounting as 10 the dstribuye assets OF the
old company, and they sent out circular to great
number stockholders proposing that they should
appear by the counsel Of the trustees. Many OF the
stockholders acted upon this suggestion An account
ing was bad. and dividend declared OF % per share
Some time after this twenty-five persons who had ap-
peared and accepted the dividend applied to the Court
opcu uocIcc Oh Jney occh ue-
ceyed by the trustees circular and that the suit was
brought IN the interest OF the trustees This suit was
witnrawn ultimately, and new dividend OF 81 per
share was declared and accepted by those defend
ants The last suit brought by other defendants
who had appeared as suggested by the circular They
renewed the motion made by The Twenty-Five other de-
PENDANTS TO reopen Judgment and on the same grounds


In rendering OPINION yesterday, Judge Barrett says
the question Is not TO whaher the Southern properly
could be recovered. The point is whether the plaintiffs
knowing the expectations and hODes OF tho share
holders have prevented them by unfair means from at
least making the attempt, in tbs action, to realize
such expectations to hold the plaintiffs re-
sponsible for their generalization. The plaintiffs
should have distinctly stated IN their circular
that the attorneys to whom they referred were
their own attorneys and counsel In the suit and they
should have given Information to the precise nature
and object OF the Enstein suit They were silent as TO
Plant and the Southern Express Company and the alu-
TO the Ernsteins guarded and incidental; the
gravamen of the charge omitted, and they only
state the suit brought for accounting cOncern-
lug the trust fund" Considering the nature OF the Elm
stein suit, all this was only calculated TO mslead the
defendants. The Court then decides that the parties TO


the present suit be said to have acquesced In the
decree and 1t must be opened for them and generally
but the twenty-five who made the former notion with.
drew II ana received the second dividend must be held
t. have acquesced in the Judgment aud IL Is not opened
for them