Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1891-09-18

tnO ftNtlAl NNhiA ab1ihf "hi' hHa''hAtN
Justice Anderson sat In an adjoining
room aud asslstod In the disposal Of
oases ON the law aud motion calendar.
The following matters occupied
Judge Zane's time, but our report was
crowded out yesterday afternoon.
INTERESTING POINT.
The People OF Utah, on the relation
Of Elijah Sells, Secretary Of the Terri.
tory, and ox-oflclo examiner Of corpO.
ratlons, plaintiffs, Va. The Salt Lake
Abstract. Title, Guaranty and Trust
Company, Joseph II. Smith, William
II. Pricn, william J. Harvey, John
w. Nen and Edward W. Center, de-
PENDANTS.
Judge LOofbourow represented the
plaintiffs and Attorney Frank Pierce
appeared ON the other side.
The complaint alleged that the de-
PENDANT company IL corporation, or
ganlred under the laws Of the Territory
on the 9th day Of September, 1859. aud
holds itself out ~ tho public n quali-
fled and authorized TO engage In the
business OF mailing insurance Of every
Kind pertaining to titles TO real
estate, Of loAning money on real
estate security or otherwise, Of acting
~ administrator or executor Of estates
of deceased persons, ~ guardian 81
estates Of mliiora aud Incompetent per.
fonr, A. assignee OF receiver, and Of ac-
cepting and executing trusts u every
"A. Ns.Nl a.. Ia III In 81
the powers Oftrusi mentioned In sec. !,
chap. rs Of the laws Of tho Goth session
VI the legislative assembly Of Utah
Territory, approved March lath, 1880.
That the corporation has failed, me-
elected amt refused to comply with the
provisions thereof, has not OF IT, capt.
tsl slOO,0OO paid up In money, that II
has not at any time kept In money on
hand, or on deposit la banks, or iu'
vested In frst mortgage or
real estate In Utah Territory,
In bonds Of iirst or second class cities
u the Territory, or In bonds Of the
United States, the sum named or any
part thereof on the contrary, the de-
iendant company, II was alleged, cx.
cfcised the powers enumerated In the
foregoing section without complying
with IL provisions, and Of ils capital
stock no part has ever been paid In
money. The relator, before the com.
mencement Of this action, accordingly
notified the company In writing TO dis
continue business, but this had not
been needed. Tho parties named In
the complaint, the telstor had Teen
Informed, were the present HOLDER Of
the stock OF the defendant corporation,
ana 10 whom distribution should he
made Of the assets which may remain
after meeting Its liabilities, COM
pletlng It, trusts and pay
Ing the costs Of this proceeding.
The plaintiffs further prayed that the
court now decree that the defendant
corporation be dissolved, that a IT,
ooiver be appointed 10 take charge u
ils business and property, wind up It's
affair, and that each Of the defendants
be- required TO show TO tho court their
several Interests In the assets Of the
corporation, TO the end that proper and
equitable distribution he made.
The amended demurrer Of tho
defendants set forth that the com.
plant did not state facts sufficient 10
constitute n cause OF action. Defend.
ants dcmurrcd especially la that the
act " tho governor and legislative
assembly OF the Territory referred 10
In the complaint was Unconstitutional
and void, 40 far that II impaired the
contract between the Territory and tho
defendant corporation, aud the obi.
cations OF that between the corporation
and the lncorpOratofs or stockholders
In such company. Said act Of the
governor and legislative assembly was
unconstitutional aud void In that II
deprived tho defendants Of property
without due process OF law. Defend.
ants therefore asked that the COM
plant be dismissed with costs.
After hearing the arguments pro
and con, his honor held that under the
old general corporation act the legisla.
turc might modify or repeal; that tho
new law was not unconstitutional, but
merely modification Of the old law.
II II were not NO, fictitious or lrr,spon.
sible c0rporntions might impose upon
the public ut VIII, and the government
might grant away any franchise ~ 10
the rights Of the people. The demurrer
was overfulrd, thirty days being al.
lowed 10 answer.
OTHER MATTERS.
q. n. y. Mikesell VI. Robert NJ.
Porutur, administrator, demurrer over.
ruled; ten days 10 answer.
Joseph Baumgarton vs.. George Cul.
len; demurrer 10 complaint submitted
yesterday sustained; fifteen days TO
amend.
George w. Crozler ct al. VI. o. u.
Pratt ct nj; complaint sustained.
Minnie Bfintou, 10y guardian, vs..
Waldemar Van Colt ct nl.; demurrer
10 the complaint sustained.
George T.. Culmer IT al. vs.. +. ID.
Clln; demurrer 10 complaint Overfulrd.
North Western Masonic association
W. Alice j. Kramer 1t al; motion for
Judgment ON plesdings allowed, aud
ten lays 10 amend complaint.
Thomas u. BywAter w. Salt Lake
City; dismissed on motion Of plaintiff
W. 5, Mccormick VI. Henry Sadler;
on motion Of defendant this case was
set tor hearing ON the 2ith Inst.
Edwin Iiushton et nj. vs.. Moses
Hallett et al; dcmnrr,r 10 second
amended complaint argued by NJ. NJ.
Kaighn for plaintiff, ana Marshall a.
ROylc for the defendants, aud submit
ted 10 the Court.
John Moran W.. Mingo Furnace Co.;
demurrer submitted anu ten days al
lowed TO answer.
international Loan aud Trust COM
pany vs. Citizens National hank;
change Of venue to Finl District court
at Ogden allowed.
Abraham (iOrdOn va Mattio liOrdon.