Page:Oregon Historical Quarterly volume 25.djvu/312

 274 JOHN TILSON GANOE the courts ruled that he had no jurisdiction. 54 The legality of the company was also tested when the company sought to recover money due on the subscription stock of the company and the defendant pled that the corporation was not duly organized. Again the question of organiza- tion was evaded. 55 In one case, however, the West Side Company was suc- cessful. They influenced a bondholder in their company to contest the right of the East Side Company to the name Oregon Central Railroad on the ground that the use of the name Oregon Central Railroad Company af- fected the value of his bond. The court ruled that the West Side Company had had the prior organization and that the East Side Company could not use that corporate name. This decision meant that the East Side Company must change its name. Holladay as yet was merely in the construction com- pany, but when so much opposition was aroused, he sent a communication to the directors of the company saying that unless the stocks and bonds that were in the hands of the company were transferred to him he would not carry on the construction. He agreed to assume all the debts of the company and carry on teh work. 56 In com- pliance to his wishes the directors turned over to Hol- laday all the stock they posessed save one share. Thus Holladay and Company came into full control of the Oregon Central Railroad Company. As we have noted, however, the right to use the name Oregon Central Company had been contested. Not only this, in the meantime a dispute had arisen between Hol- laday and Elliott. Elliott had been dismissed as superin- tendent of construction of the East Side Company's road. Accordingly he filed suit for dissolution and settlement of the co-partnership. Holladay held that Elliott had fraud- 54 Oregon Reports, Vol. III. Oregon Central R. R. Co. vs. Wait. 56 Minutes, Sept. 7, 1869. O. &C.R. R. vs. U. S., Vol.X,page 5059.
 * Reports, Vol. Ill, Oregon Central RL R. Co. vs. Scoggin.