Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1891-06-26
Mr.. Finley Continues his Maria
tive to the Committee.
FROM RECEIVER TO ATTORNEY.
Fighting the intervention of the State and of
the Missouri, Kansas and Texas.
He Corrects a Number of Inaccuracies
that Appeared in the Galveston News,1
bu. Doesn't Say the Report
was Garblcd.
speciaI to the Gazette.

Special to the Gazette.
GALVESTON, TEX, June 25.-The legisla-
tive committee investigating the Interna-
toual and Great Northern railway receiver
ship met at 10 o'clock.
Mr.. Finley resumed the stand. Before
continuing his statement the witness de-
sired to correct two inaccuracies that ap-
reared in the Galveston News report. The
News. he said, reported him as saying Chill
ton told during the recess of the court OF
his intervention and of the Intervention of
the state and the eDdeavor to have re-
ceiver appc nted. He did not state
that Chiffon said anything about the inter-
ypufion of the state. The state had not in
tervened in the suit at the time and did not
until the following September. Chiffon
stated he had fled a formal Intervention
hastily TO prevent Judgment being taken by
confe sion. He then told me of his inten-
ton TO file further plea and told me the
char, rter Of il.
Another inaccuracy TO which l wish TO
call the attention of the committee occurs
in the beginning of the conversation be-
tween Mr.. Chiffon and myself on the 9Th of
March, in which he related TO me the fact
that Mr.; Mr. Cochran Coz NH, was -, at H Hy.er
don had said about the interview
that had taken place between Col. Hender
son and Mr.. Cochran. Before leaving the
matter Of my resignation l desire to state
further fact that has occurred to my MEM
or, on reflection: On the 18th of March,
the day upon which formerly rendered my
resignation, and after my determination to
resign was fixed and expressed, some one
Of the counsel interested IN the matter, do
.ot recollect who it was, suggested IN the
form of an inquiry as to my wishes whether
or not it would be more agreeable to me for
the ,0urt
TO MAKE A PARTIAL ORDER
on the allowance TO me, and for me then to
accept some other employment under the
receiVerShip. In that connection ! recollect
that Mr.. Duncan expressed himself as
being very much disinclined TO see
me entirely severed from the re-
ceivership and offered TO tender his
resignation as general attorney and let me
accept the position, receiving the salary OF
that office. That conversation was stopped
pcremptorily by my saying that l would
not accept any employment under the re-
reiyers whatever. When my resignation
was accepted | desired my relations to the
receivership TO be entirely cut off and did
not want to have any connection with them
afterwards.
Perhaps next in order so far as / am con-
cerned would be the matter of my subse-
uuent allowance by the court. The date of
that order speaks for itself March 80, l be-
lieve, 1889. wrote out the order myself
and presented it TO Judge McCord and he
signed il and
MADE THE ORDER.
then tcok that order, which had been
made on separate piece of paper, to the
receiver, Col. Bonner, and presented it to
him, and he said that as soon as he could
voucher it the money should be paid to me,
and shortly afterwards he gave
me notice that the money was
placed TO my credit in the
bank. I know nothing further of that or
ucr. Whether it was ever recorded in the
minutes of the court l do not know; and
while am speaking of the recording OF the
order just here | will mention that notice
in my statement contained in the News
that | am reported as saying that
the court entered his order allowing me
$1,000 upon The minutes of the court. This
IS an inaccurate statement. He entered
that order upon his bench docket, and it
was the reafter carried to the minutes of the
court l read the order TO Col. Bonner
and"
did you read the order to Col. Bonner
when you went TO him with it,
II did. sir. After this had nothing fur
Their to do with the receivership or the liti-
CATION touching it At the September term
Of court. 1889, ] was away from home. |
was in no way connected with the litigation
at that time, September, 1889,
and ! was not in court when the pro-
ceedings were had which took place at
that term of court Marsh & Butler, with
snom became associated as partners in
the practice of law i'll 1883, had been en-
ployed as local attorneys for the plaintiffs
IN the suit of Kennedy & Sloan, trustees of
The first mortgage bondholders. After the
September term of SO l became an at
torney with Marsh & Butler in
these Kennedy y Sloan suits,
representing the plaintiffs and being
I,ith sherman & Starting
New York and Willie, Mott & Ballinger of
Galveston. AT the February term Of 1890
TOOK PART IN THE PROCEEDINGS
had in the court. Kennedy & Sloan and the
Farmers loan aud trust company were act
ing in harmony III their suits, both of them
fighting the intervention of the state and
the intervention of the Missouri, Kansas
and Texas, and hence the lawyers for the
plaintiffs in each of these suits
associated a great deal together in the man
sgement of the litigation and acted in con-
cert in all matters At this February term
Of 1890 ] took part in the arguments that
were made in opposition to the intervention
of the state through Attorney-General
Hogg, ana in opposition TO the intervention
of the Missouri Kansas and Texas, repre-
scented by Simon Sterne and other foreign
counsel in connection with MessrS. Woldert
4 johnson of Tyler. The litigation was
continued at that term of court,
generally, that is to say, by the
consent of all parties after the Missouri,
Kansas and Texas had filed a motion to sup
press certain important dispositions which
were taken by the plaintiffs in these bond
suits and which he regarded as
MOTION WELL FOUNDED.
"Nothing of importance occurred, so far as
[ know, in the matter until
the September term of 1890. At
that time the foreign council for
the plaintiffs in the case of
the Farmers loan and trust
company an1 the case of Ken
nedy and Sterne ucamesto Tyler prepared
and anxious for trial of their cases. / will
state. however. these causes had been set for
particular day of the term by committee
Of the lawyers which had been at the
previous term of the court appointed by the
court for the purpose of setting their
civil docket, as was the case with US in our
court The time at which this litigation
was set down by that committee for trial
was governed by the
SUGGESTION OF THE NEW COUNSEL
rs 10 the time that it would suit their con-
venience My recollection is now that Mr..
Shearman had gone to Europe, that he
could not get back and be at Tyler in time
to try that case sooner in that term.
The case was called for trial
The Missouri, Kansas and Texas
through its attorneys, sought postpone
ment on account of the claimed illness of
Mr.. Simon Sterne, whom they represented
as being the leading counsel IN the itiga-