Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1875-12-20
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT.
1he chesapeake and Ohio Receiver
iP-NOtiOn TO Dismiss Proceed

Court was TO have been held in this city at 10
clock this morning for the purpose Of hearing
argument upon the motion to dismiss all pro-
oeeuIugs 10 that court 10 the case of A. f.
hlchards aud others, bondholders and creditors
against the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad
company, on the ground that some of the
plaintiffs and defendants in the case are resi-
debts Of the same State, New York; which
TACT 1t Is claimed GUSTS the jurisdiction Of the
Uolted States court.
At the request Of Mr.. William NJ. Evarts.
counsel Tor the railroad company. judge Bond
invited Chlet Justice Waite to assist him at
the hearing, In the absence of Judges Hughes,
whose illness prevents his attending upon the
court, and at 10 clock he Chief Justice and
The counsel for the various Interests involved
10 the suit and many members of the legal
fraternity assembled 10 the court room but
owing to the absence of Judge Bond the Chief
Justice announced informally that be had tel
egraphed to him, aud that Judge Bond could
not arrive before o'clock, at which time The
court would reasonable, and recess was then
taken.
The magnitude Of the interests involved in
this case make 1t one Of more than ordinary
notice, and the Supreme Court will doubtless
lually De required to pass upon the intricate
questions CT State aud Fedora! iuris fiction
Whlch the issues involve.
lhe eminent counsel engaged, representing
me various interests, are the Hon. William NJ.
EVartS, OF New York, aud Judge Robclt, q,
OF charlottesville, Va, for the railroad com
pany Judge SGlpman and Mr.. MacFarIand
ol New ork, tor the trustees of the first mort.
gage SIX per cent. bonds, representing fifteen
millions Of bonds; Judge Stprrs, of New York,
tor the trustees OF the seven per ceut. mort gage
bonds; Francis l.. Smith, ESQ.,, of this city,
: Representing $l50,00O of bonds Judge Crump
and Jas. Alfred Juurs, esq, of Rcamond, for
suudry creditors aud bondholders; aud Judge
Marshall aud Colonel John Howard, of Rich
moud representing Interests OF various parties
advers. t., the motion to dismiss.
A orlct outline Of the history of the litigation
to Its preset stage as furnishing tue boundary
70 the questions 10 controversy is as follows:
. Va Ocober 9, 1915, n. f. Il chards aud others,
eted'ors ami bondholders, flied bill in this
court alleging the Insolvency Of th,. c}npauv,
grayiog that it be turned over to a receiver,
and Henry Tyson was accordingly Appointed
+ temporary receiver. aud the case set for hear
ing at hichm1nd as TO the appointment of per-
mancut receiver Before the hearing, sundry
other creditors and boudhoders flied their ne
uticns, praying to be made parties 10 the suit,
among others the State Of Virginia becoming
party and Gu the 22d of October the case again
eamc 90 Tor hearing iu Richmond before Judge
Bond, at which time most of the plaintiffs
asked that Gen Williams G. Wiekham be an
po'o'ed RECEIVER IN the place Of Mr.. Tyson, the
f SiatH OF Virginia asking the appointment of
Major CarrlDgton, Of Richmond, when the
court took time to consider the several aprlica-
.Ions uut'l the Both Of October at which time
; Iysou was appointed permanent receiver by
the court. Before the appointment was made.
however, the defendants made motion
through their COUNSEL, Mr. Eqarts, at Rich
mond to dismiss The cause on the ground
That TIE UuIted States courts have no iurisdic,
ton, because the parties to the suit are resi-
dents or the same State, New York; end not
OF dltt"ren; States, winch is The ground Of Fed
eral jurisdiction in this case The counsel for
the painrltt+ Judge Snipman, admitted the
want Of jurisdiction, and asked that thew be
allowed TO withdraw the case from the United
States c5ur'. The court took time to consider
tie motion, aud fixed the hearing for to-day,
and upon the suggestion of Mr. Evarts Judge
bond requested the Chief Justice to sit with
him at tue hearing OF the notion to which the
Chef Justice assented.
bendng the decision of the question of jurs
dctlou OF the United States court the same
credl; 1rs, who, 10 conjunction with the railroad
mpany are adverse to the appointment of
MIR. Tyson as receiver, filed another BILL like.
wise praying for a receiver,in the Circuit Cour.
OF Virginia at Richmond, and Judge Wexford,
acting upon the application. appointed Gen.
| Williams 4. Nlckham, the former president
OF the road, the receiver to enter upon the dis
charge OF his duties when he might lawfully
do so; aud If the Circuit Court of the United
States decides that it has no jurisdiction, Gen.
Nlckham will enter upon the discharge of his
dulles by virtue OF his appointment from Judge
Wexford
At O'Clock the court reassemoled, Judge
Bond, who had been delayed by an Interrupt
ton to the train, having arrived
Il. L.. omoot, esq, representing Mr.. New.
comer, Mr.. K. Z Smith, and Caroline Dyer
oondholders TO the amount of $4,000, submit
tea petition on their part praying to BE- made
partles plalntl1 l the cause, which was grant
ed. The petitioners in these cases prefer TYSON
as receiver.
Francis L. Smith, ESQ.,, said that before the
argument upoo the case commenced he desired
to present the petition of Auson Bags, cred
ltor, who holds Sl46.O00 Of the compauv's
bonds, and asked leave to fla the petition.
The Chief Justice requested Mr.. Smith to
read the petition, after readiog which Mr..
Eearts said these questions would all arise upoo
the argument. Il the court had no jurisdiction
1t could enter no orders in the cause.
Mr.. Howard, Of Richmond, desired to pre-
sent the petition ofa judgment creditor, Mr..
ochmuck, whose cain is 100000.
The Chief Justice said all the claims would
be heard together.
The Chief Justice said that the motion be-
fore the court is to dismiss the rrocoedugs,
and counsel 10 favor Of that motion would be-
heard first, and those resisting the motion !
| afterwards.
Mr. Evarts, counsel for the company, then
opened the argument 10 favor Of dismsspg
the proceedings 10 the United States Courr. |
lie claimed that the parties to the suit should |
have due notice Of the application of the |
various parties who now desire to be made |
parties to the suit. He criticised the lan |
| guage of the petition that miscalled tho