Year: 1877

During tho last term OF tho Supreme Court Cham.
bers an application made before Judge Lawrence
for a mandamus 10 compel William H. Vanderbilt and
others, directors cicers Of the Lake Shore Rail-
road Company TO furnish list Or facilities for OBJ
tainng list OF all the stockholders of tho company
The proceeding instituted by Mr. Rufus Hatch aud
number OF other stockholders with Wow to procure
the names OF their that proper steps
might be taken Ia their to compel
a removal of the present management and q
change tho administration of the affairs
Of the company This change, IL was alleged op/the
parl of tho plaintiffs would put end to the existing
ruinous policy in regard to trcghts and fares put
era millions OF dollars tho treasury OF tho CON-
pany, and bring about regular payment OF dividends
The answering adavts rot only contradiced those OF
plaintiffs to facts but set up us matter OF law that
they compelled to submit their books to tho
specton Of stockholders only for certain number OF
days before the regular annual election, which would
not bo reached for some time yet. The questions OF
law were argued ut great length by Mr. Henry Ben
nett and Messrs. Sewell and Vandcrpoe Tor tho
plaintiffs and by Mr.. william NJ. Evarts and associates
tor the defendants Judge Lawrence rendered his
the questions OF law invoIve in the case As the case
is an important ono to railroad corporations anu
owners Of railroad stock the opinion OF Judge Law
renee Is gwen IN FULL


The conclusions which have arrived in this case


First-rhat the Lake shore and Michigan Southern
Railway Company. having been Incorporated in this
State under the Consolidation nc is to be regarded


yecond-The of ls42 relied upon by the reiators
counsel does not therefore apply to this


Third--l do not understand that the provisions Of
section l. OF title H. OF chapter Is, OF part OF the
Revised statutes. deprive the Court of the power TO
grant mandamus at the instance Of a stockhold to
compel the exhibition OF the transfer books at other
times than during the thirty days previous
no,ra 70 an cooe oec'on 9q proper case sne
lime, but the reasons for granting tho writ
should be clear and cogent II is not claimed IN this
that thnrai uxritl 4 brtv Iuv
and the is therefore within the provisions OF
the Revised Statutes Just referr.dto


FOurth-An examination OF the papers read In favor
OF and in opposition to the motion must think convince
any lmpal ta mind that there Is cxigency existing
which calls for the granting OF tho writ applied tor in
this lhe charges Of m,smanngenelt the part
Of tho present Board Of Directors, some of them
very iuy met and denied by tho respondents ALL
davIts ana The reduction OF tho through reght and
passenger rates. and the division OF such rates 20
be thoroughly justified by the facts and circumstances
stated in tho respondents alidavits Wine, there
FORE am not prepared 10 concede that tho power OF this
Court to issue u mandamus to compel the exhibition
OF the transfer books can only be exercised during the
period OF thirty days prior TO an election, do not
thiuk tnat the made by the relaor calls Tor the
granting OF the writ The case referred 10 by the
iator's counsel, decided by Mr.. Justice Sutherland,
which the rela or desired to examine the
books the purpose OF canvassng for tho election,
and appears from the report that tho election
take place whn eight nine days subsequent to tho
application There was therefore an cxigency existing
In that The corporation whose treasurer pro-
ceedcd against was foreign corporation and the rcator
under the act OF 1872 absolutely entitled TO examine
the books at all reasonable times. Furthermore If
the corporation had been domestic corporation, as
the election to TAKE place within thirty days, the
reiaor, under the provisions OF the Revised Statutes
herein before mentioned, would have been entitled 10
the inspection which he prayed tor There IL, there
FORE nothing in that which initiates against views
which have taken regard TO tho case ut bar. The
case of The People cx rel Richmond vs.. Tho Pacific
counsel clearly distinguished from the present
In that case the charter OF the company pro-
vided that book containing the of
Inc stockholders should be kept py the
treasurer or clerk 'whch book should at all
reasonable times be open Tor the inspcc-
ton OF the creditors and stockholders of the
said corporation at the Office or principal
learned Justice who delivered tho opinion OF the
Court in that refers to the provisions OF the Re-
vIsed Statutes before mentioned and comes to the
clusion that the book which that relator desired to
examine such a book the statute gave him
right TO inspect II does not appear iron the report
OF the whether the application was made within
thirty days previous to election for that parcu
lar purpose an examination or inspection Of the book
desired, but IL will be observed that under tho
charter OF the company the right OF the O.
iator to inspect the book at all reasonable
times absolute. This would alone entte the
rcator TO the writ Of mandamus have not been re-
errcd TO any such opinion IN the charter act
tihcate of incorporation of the Lake Shore Railway
Com pany contained In that OF the Pacific Mail
Steamship Company, did understand that 1t was
claimed upon the gument that such provision
listed. The motion i0r a mandamus must therefore be
den led, with costs.


Tho plaintiffs have already announced their intention
to appeal from the above decision, that the matter
is likely to occupy the attention OF tho courts for
some time to come.