The Leavenworth weekly times. [volume] (Leavenworth, Kan.) 1870-1880, 1879-10-30
TIE Il. STOCK.

One OF the. most difficult problems that
our people have been called upon 10 deal
with for several yesrs is the question OF
the transfer of the K. p. stock TO me Kan
sas Central. There are strong Arguments
20 be brought forward on both sides, and
when the case is presented, as it has been,
by the attorneys Of the respective parties,
the people, after hearing both sides, are at
q loss to know what course they ought 10
pursue.
On the one side, il is held that the coun-
ty, having agreed to turn the stock over TO
the Kansas Central on tn completion of
fifty miles of road, ought to live up to its
contract. The friends OF the road ssy this
stock was offered as a subsidy to the Kan
sas Central Company, to secure the coz
struction of road directly west from this
point, to be built and operated in the in
terest of Leavenworih, and that the stock
should be now transferred without sny
question or opposition.
Ga the other side, it is urged that while 4
section of the road has been built, accord
ing to the contract, the first year, it has
not been pushed ahead since that
time as the Company agreed TO DO. The
contract between the road and the county
was that fifty miles should be built the first
year, and one hundred additional miles
each year thereafter till the Colorado line
should be reached. II the first fifty miles
should be completed, according TO the terms
of the contract, the stock should then be
given to the company. The rosd Compiled
with the first part of the contrsct-it built
the frat fifty miles during the specified
time, and then claimed the stock. The
county turned over the stock, as the road
desired, but the Kansas Pacific refused to
make the transfer on its books, thus refus-
ing to recognize the kansas Central as
owner of the stock. In this shape the mat
ter went into court-.he Kansas Central
parties, claiming the stock, bringing action
to compel the K. p. company to make the
transfer. After the case had been taken
into court the county became co-defendant
with the K. p. road, in resisting the traus.
fer. Then, at late meeting of the Board,
the County Commissioners instructed the
County Attorney 10 withdraw from the
case, and thus give consent, 90 far as
the county was concerned, to having the
transfer made. 1t is this action Of the
Boarl thst isao~ exciting so much COM
ment and criticism. since many people be-
lieve that the Board should have taken no
steps in the matter, but as the question
was in court should have permitted 1t to
remain there until adjudicated.
On the other hand, it is held By the
Kansas Central folks tina: the county was
in honor bound to pursue Just such q
course as the Commissioners have taken.
They sssert that the stock was given BY
the county to company composed Of our
own people, for the purpose of encoursg.
ing them to invest their money in road
to be built for our own interests, and that
without this promise of assistance on the
part of the county. they would not have
undertaken the enterprise. They say they
went to work in good faith to comply with
the letter of the contract, that they built
the first fifty miles within the FIRST year &c
cording to agreement, and intended to
push the line forward at the
rate of one hundred miles per year, when
the panic came on and caused total
suspension Of railroad work all over the
country-thst they have made every rea-
sonable effort that could be made to ad-
vance the work. They think that all these
circumstances should be taken into consid-
GRAFTON by the people of the county. Hav-
ing complied with their agreement to
build City miles during the first year, snd
having received the stock from the County,
they say it is now simply qn,s-io. Of
honor whether the county shall let the
matter stand - It is, or make common
cause with rival corporation in attempt
ing to harra8 them.
Ga the part of those who Oppose the
trauaier it is claimed that this STICK. which