Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1891-10-25
UNDER AMUSEMENT.
The Intervention Suit of the Central Trust
Company VS.. East Line and Red River

Special to the Gazette.
AUSTIN. TEX. Oct 24-The intervention
suit of the Central trust company, repre-
Senting the bondholderS. in the case of the
state against the East Line and Red River
railway. was argued to-day III Judge Key s
court Fisher s. TowneS of Austin and
Mr.. Beach of New York represented the
bondholders. and Sawnie Robertson and
Mr. Craddocls the receiver. and the petition of
intervenorS asked for foreclosure and sale
of the road under the trust company'S lien.
The receiver, through his attorneys. re-
sisted the application on the ground that
the road was in no condition to serve the
public efficiently, and that he mad not vet
hal time to execute the orders of the court,
made about six weeks ago. authorizing him
to eXpend about SO. 900 for bettermentS and
improvements. Until that could be done,
and the debts against the road ascertained
AMI paid. it should not be-Should al least
not be TO satisfy the single claim of the in
terveuor, while other debts equally as valid
remained unsatisfied
Receiver Giles stated that he had pur-
chased only one coach and one engine and
some steel under the authority recently
granted by the court. He needed coaches
badly. but had not the money wherewith to
buy them. and did not purchase on credit
because of the increased cost. He intimated
that if allowed TO issue receiver certificates
for S65 600 he could raise the money and
equip the road as it should be equipped.
The intelrenor'S attorney urged that
under the representation made, the receiver
ship might 60 on indefinitely; that it was
better for all directly interested that it
should end at once. If the creditors, one of
which is the Missouri, Kansas and Texas,
should purchase the road at foreclosure. it
would be at once rebuilt, thoroughly
equipped and put i'll the best possible condi-
lion, and in every way be made to carry
out the requirements of the state laws.
The road had learned Il lesson and would
hereafter profit by it. The receivers nor
the court could not improve the road, for
lack of money, as well nor aS expeditiously
as could the purchasers and owners of il,
hence in the interest of the public service
and the public good ii should be sold. ami
sold said the counsel, subject. if the court
plesses, TO all the claims. debts and dues of
whatsoever sort held against it. The inter
venOr will make that concession an induce
ment and reason why the foreclosure should
De ordered.
The court took the matter under advise
ment. II is doubtful if the court, which for
feited the road S charter for not complying
with the law and for falling into 4 ram
shacke condition, will turn it over again to
the delinquent owners in condition any
wise improved beyond that in which its cor
porate life was taken.
Referring to the dispatch from Hemp
stead published in this mornings papers
to the effect that the merchants and farm
ers al Hampstead We're enraged at an i'll
crease in rates heretofore prevailing on
cotton at that point equivalent TO a reduc-
ton in price of sc per pound. the commits
sion states that there has been no increased
rate authorized by it. and that the rate from
Hampstead TO Houston is 30 cents per 100
poundS and TO Galveston 81 cents. The
Houston rate is just what it was before the
commission was organized and the Calves
ton rate is cents per 100 pounds less.