The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1883-07-19
QUO wARRANTO PKoOEED1Nas.
Important Suits Commenced Against tn

Important SHIFTS Commenced Against the
X, p. and U. P. Railroads.
Commonwealth: Two cases of para
mount importance to the people of Kan
sas, and to the stockholders of the Kan
sas Pacific railway company were insti-
tuted by Attorney General johnson
yesterday in the supreme court.
The cases referred to are the quo war
ranto suits against the Kansas Pacific
and the Union Pacific railroad compan-
les, which were directed to be brought
by house concurrent resolution No. Is,
passed by the last legislature.
The petition in the Kansas Pacific
case sets out in full the act of the terri,
torial legislature, Incorporating the
Leavenworth, Pawnee s. Western rail-
road company, which was passed IN
1855. The supplemental act passed by
the territorial legislature in 1857, and
the articles of consolidation and union
between the Union Pacific railroad com
pany, which was organized under an
act OF congress of July 1, 1862, an act of
congress of July 2, 1864, and various
other acts amendatory of the foregoing,
the Kansas Pacific railway company,
which is the same and successor of the
Leavenworth, Pawnee 81 Western rail.
road company, and the Denver Pacific
Railway and Telegraph company, or
ganized under the acts of congress re-.
ferred to, and an act of congress ap-
proved March 3. 1869, whereby there
was attempted to be formed the Union
Pacific railway company.
The petition alleges that the maine of
the Leavenworth, PaWnee IL Western
Railroad company was changed first TO
the Union Pacific Railroad company.
Eastern Division, and afterwards to the
Kansas Pacific Railway company. That
| in pursuance and under the charter and
powers granted by the special acts of
1855 and 1857, passed by the territorial
legislature, the road was constructed
anu operated until the 24th day of Jan
Hary, 1880, when the consolidated COM
| panY was formed.
1t alleges as grounds for forfeiture the
failure Oh the Kansas Pacific railway 70
perform certain duties deVOIving on il
by the territorial acts referred to, name.
1y: failure to make an annual report Of
the operations OF the company. which
by the Charter was requir-
ed TO be filed with fine
secretary OF state each year; the failure
| To keep. a general Office in the state. OF
near the main line4of its foad, for the
transaction of its business, and the re.
moVal of all its Offices, all of books ol
accounts and statistics outside of the
| jurisdiction of the state of Kansas. &c
Omaha, Nebraska, the headquarters oil
the consolidated company; the failure tC
| designate and file certificates of desiona
ton with the clerks ofthe district court
in each county along the line. of persons
upon whom process issued by the courts
OF the state may or might not be served
ana hnaIIy Its attempted consolidation
with parallel and competing line, and
the sale and transfer TO the consolidated
company OF all Its property, thereby
wholly disabling it from fulfilling IL.
obligations TO the state.
Il The allegations of the petition are
based Oh the theory that railroads art
public highways and not the exclusive
private property of the corporation ano
that the corporate franchises and The
night TO construct, operate the railroad
and charge freight and passenger far
tor the use of it by the public was il
7 consideration of the improvements pu
upon the highway and the great benefits
TO the public, and that q forfeiture O
the franchises and the right to take toll
for the travel over this highway, Left tn.
highway and the property and the i'm
, prOVements put upon it the property o
the state, free from any claims Of stock
holders, and subject only to the right
of creditors.
. The attorney general has employee
to assist him some of the best legal tai
, ent in the state, as we'll as the great anti
monopoly lawyer of Pennsylvania
: Hon. Jere s. Black. The associate
counsel in Kansas are W. Fl. Rossingtol
; OF Topeka, Hon. Geo. s. Green of Man
haitian and A. A. Harris Of Fort Scott
prominent in their profession.
The case Will probably come up 70
hearing in the Supreme court in Sep
TENDER, and an early decision is expec.
ed in view of the immense interest in
volved.
The defendants will probably be rep
resented by A. L. Williams of Topeka
: Judge Usher of Lawrence and juds
John F. Dillon Of New York City.