Gould-Huntington_0003

[Top right corner:] 2

[left margin:]
The corporations
represented by
C. P. Huntington owned
and are operating
a continues through
line from the Pacific
Coast to the Gulf of
Mexico and to
New Orleans —

C. P. Huntington and Mr. Gould were constructing lines
of railroads between New Orleans and the Pacific
Occean [Ocean] —

[left margin:]
The Corporations
represented by Mr G. [ Mr. Gould ]
owned and were
operating lines of
road from St Louis
and other points on
the Mississippi River
and points in the
interior westward
with an alternate
intention of reaching
the Pacific Ocean.

Mr Gould were building westward and C. P. Huntington
"were stretching his"[crossed out] having completed his line through
California and Arizona were building eastward thro'
New Mexico and was constructing a portion of the lines
of the G. H. & S. A. [Galveston, Harrisburg, & San Antonio Railway] in Texas.

[left margin:]
The parties became
satisfied that it was
for the best interests
of all of the
corporations to
have but one line
west of El Paso.

Mr. Gould therefore claimed that these lines built by C. P. Huntington in Arizona New Mexico and Texas were the property
of the Texas and Pacific because built upon its right
of way and were a usuperation [usurpation] of the franchises granted
to the Texas and Pacific.

[left margin:]
By the terms of the
agreement the
title and owner-
-ship of that line
was quoted and
conceded to be in
the corporations
represented by
C. P. Huntington.

As will be seen by a perusal of the contract of Nov. 26
1881. a long and protracted litigation arose between the
T & P [Texas and Pacific] and the "lines were"[crossed out] companies controlled by C. P. Huntington and it was found to use the language of
the contract that —

"the continuation of such litigation was injurious to all
of said companies and incidentally "to the public" [underlined]
interest so far as the business of said lines was concerned"

"And whereas said differences and litigation have been found
upon conference and deliberation to the suspectable of
amicable adjustment, as in this contract provided."

There after the terms of the contract are stated, its provided
in Sec XV that although either party resort to the courts
to protect any right secured by this agreement, yet they