San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1890-08-22
THE ARKANSAS PASS MUDDLE.
The Receivership of the S. A. p. is
All Right

The Receivership of the S. A. p. is
All Right.
The recent intervention of the Farm
erS' Trust and Loan company in the suit
of johnson and Hansen VS.. the Arkansas
Pass railway has been wrongfuly con-
Strued as an attack on the receivers of the
road and to have them removed. This is
not the case as the L. L. and T. company
is only dissatisfied with the action of the
45th district court in creating the receiver
ship on the application of a creditor whose
debt was small and who had no lien to
cover it, whereas the intervening defend
ant has first and second mortgages on the
property OF the road, and lien on all the
property and franchises of the road and
all the rights or property to be acquired,
their debt amounting to 1925, 900, with
slSO,OO due as unpaid interest on the
bonds sold by the company. The petit
TONERS answer of Intervention sets forth
at great length the claims of intervenorS
to be heard first.
Mr.. Perry j. Lewis, attorney for John
son and Hansen, said that the removal
would be vigorously contested, for the
reason that the federal court
never recognizes laborerS' lien
above mortgage lien, which
would give the foreign debtors the prefer
ence, and the local debtors, whose claims
have to take a back seat. The petition
will come up before Judge King who will
pass upon it. and If his decision is adverse
to removal it can he aDpealed tn the
United States court at New Orleans, or
Judge Maxey can decide the question.
The removal will be bitterly contested
by the local creditors. The road or re-
Ownership would not be particularly
affected by the transfer except as they
might desire to see the local creditors
affected by the result. The case will
come I'D before Judge King on the first
day of the September term of his court
and be set for a final hearing,
The United States Rolling Stock COM
pany and w. +. Hopkins. a bridge manu-
facturers of Missouri, and +. Raube. of
San Antonio, have interviewed with the
plaintiff. and from the eminent array of
legal talent on both sides the dispute will
be one of the most memorable known for
some time.
Following is the petition for removal
in full:
To tbo Hon w w KING Judqa of tho
35tb iudicioI JiStriot. = '"7' u ''i0
W. Som atitin0nn H. 10 r,,,or,.
TrnCt cdpmnopT rcS y Shows dbot i,
is one Of tPe defonSent'S iS the "hovn on ~
titIaS Snit TobnSnn AMI = Uanse % we fbo
So o1I a 80 nmJ hromSas De- D oiironJ
o",,nanTH tb"t 10 r,"ttar ;n %iSn~ta
tUnrpp oyy,oo om% ornusi,a "f intoraSt onJ
tS en- eASUU', e. nod T am
coS S Tie sun vi oi,, a'ue ~ ~ tTis that
9S IoiU ~ TobnS d ua, S,,S
Gmo pr%tn III Sit %t ~ Sa
Ola ro rraS poS Poi TrC "n
"LG a., tiat tho Sold corn9 io inTab{
I IN UIa' % ~ sni 90 Sc
Gu ~ Sntot ~ ~ +ohI;s u oTf6rnn az
Se1HrnS ~ ~ Soid rniv %nu 60 Uo,Ir" ~
T TI "a W. 80
aI "Ilonntio% " tbn i,'SnIyonpoJ
eaa ERA aI,eSaC,om VI we rnSo to vi Sne
SaLu ueiemSa a., oTPd Te Sa,ae n"o
Pagi So,S ~, SlS I'd - @
; 'aGen d ar n4 tT
aSthS + Tne irantio1 f Pb S'rS co Tba+
SnG is .S Nd t,o
youi 'nn dnIS 20 49, :"
s' iot GSa ~ vi ueeSS Va uST as
luily seC 1u' IN lCS answer VI L'ei nellEaoI
nIe1 medeIn s.noT uPot d., Sfr piJRiet W
IGal anu pei S11a. IlUohte anu vi
Cle co ~ Snaoo W sCc9tG oot tI
ABOUT So;ooouuo' anu CIaI ny sen, tL
tnCeresC uec9tiie uu aoo On salu Dotus vi inc
n nTSI uay Vi 1uiy, loSo, a8SleSaGiHS auouC
sfoo,oVo. az Is dlso SHOWN TS 10y saiu ansMei
Vi lnUe['euVloh' n i !oui P9 hS Oh
seeks W naEe itS lIgn eS ia Ss as asa
pi III III me-: w oiio 'G sT - So ",u
10 nave us cialin paiu III Iuli Deiore any.
thlng can DC pau u plalhIIns' "ho' IL