Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1889-09-21
THE INTERNATIONAL.
The Election of George A. Eddy to the
Presidency Decided to be Illegal,
For the Reason that at the Time of His Election
He was Receiver of Competing and
Parallel Line of Road.
Special to the Gazette.

TYLER, TEX, Sept. 20.-Numerous
suits were filed last spring involving the
control of the International and Great
Northern railway, substantially all of
which were fought through to final
settlement in the supreme court of the
state. That opinion the country under
stands as having settled the receivership
of 7. R. Bonner and ]. NJ. Eddy to be
valid and binding.
The second mortgage bondhOIders,
represented by the Farmers loan and
trust company of New York, trustees,
filed suit in the district court of Smith
county March 80, 1889, to foreclose a
lien on the International and Great
Northern railway property for nearly
eight million dollars in which suit T. R.
Bonner and J Nj. Eddy were also ap-
pointed receivers. Afterwards the first
mortgage bondholders represented by
Sloan & Kennedy, trustees. for some
eight million first mortgage bonds, filed
suit for the interest due May 9, 1889, but
did not ask to foreclOse. These two suits
did not effect the main receivership
which was opened in the case that first
went to the supreme court.
Thus matters stood until tn September
term of district court, when some
strategic movements were made by the
Missouri, Kansas and Texas railway COM
pany and its receivers. The first item in
the plea was that George A. Eddy who had
been elected president of the InteTna-
tional and Great Northern railway com
pany March |, 1889, while he was re-
ceiver of the Missouri, Kansas and Pexas
i1xrrs,y Nhny, Il
missed Messrs Whitaker s. Bonner, To-
cal attorneys, under Alexander @. Coch-
ran, general solicitor of the Interna-
tional and Great Northern railway COM
pany, and appointed Clark, Dyer &
Balinger of Waco as his attorneys for the
International and Great Northern rail-
way company. The new attorneys
promptly fled pleadings in the two bond
suits, resisting the foreclosure and al
leging invalidity of bonds, and further
alleging that the international and Great
Northern company was not represented
except by their pleadings. Soon after
the second item in the plan came in the
form of an Intervention filed by the Mis-
souri,, Kansas and Texas railway COM
pany, in two bond suits setting up the
invalidity of the bonds and other matters
of defense. As the third item of the
plan the Missouri, Kansas and Texas
company filed petition and bond for the
removal of the Farmers loan and trust
company second mortgage bond case to
the federal court.
In the meantime the state of Texas, by
its attorney general, interviewed in both
of said bond suits and set up
defenses against the bonds. The
state of Texas has already filed
hn Of
county against the Missouri, Kansas and
Texas railway company and Cross and |
Eddy, receivers thereof, to annul the |
stocks which they held, some ten million |
dollars, on the International and Great |
Northern railway company, and that |
court had issued a writ of injunction |
against George A. Eddy, president of |
the International and Great Northern |
railway company, and against Eddy and |
Gross, receivers of the Missouri, Kansas |
and Texas railway, and others, |
them to exercise any |
control whatever in the af-
fairs of the International and |
Great Northern railway company
because it was a parallel and competing
line of road to the Missouri, Kansas and
Texas railway which was managed by
them as receivers.
The trial of the various issues presented |
On the preliminary hearing came up yes
terday in the district court of Smith
county. The first was that of Alex q.
Cochran, general solicitor, and his local
counsel, Whitaker and Bonner, sup
ported by affidavits to strike out the plead
ings filed in the case by Clark, Dyer and
Balinger, as attorneys of the Missouri, /
Kansas and Texas, on the ground that
they were appointed by George A Eddy,
who was not in fact president of the
and Great Northern
railway company, and who conferred |
upon them no legal authority to appear
rs its attorney, and asking that their ap-
pointment be held valid In reply TO
this Clark, Dyer & Balinger, of the op-
posing attorneys, asked the court 10 sus-
tain their appointment, which was sup
ported by counter aifidayits. The case
was argued by Alex G. Cochran on one
side and George A. Clark on the other
The court delivered its written opinion
thereon to-day. in which the court held
that Judge Cochran, Whitaker & Bonner
were attorneys of record in said causes
and the attack of Clark, Dyer & Balinger
vas based upon their appointment by
George a. Eddy, president of the Inter
national and Great Northern railway;
that George a. Eddy S election as presi-
lent was absolutely void, and that he.
had no power to make the appoIn trDezst
IF Clark, Dyer and Balinger becausss I'm II
libited by the constitution and lS#s Gf
the state of Texas, he being an officer .Sksf
The time of his election and from sfIs3f
Tine in control of the Missouri, Kansas
aud Texas railway, it being q parallel
and competing line; also that if he
could be held as de facto president. !