The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1893-04-12


rata"
Col. Garrard stated that the road had been
run at loss, not paying the interest on its
bonds, and that bOndholders to the amount
of IS. 600 favored the same receiver and
same foreclosure with the Central system
under the reorganization plan.
what New York bondholders have done
with bonds in New York is very tangible"
said Judge Pardee, "but what they are
going to do in the future would not do to
base decision on"
Mr.. LOwREY's ARGUMENT.
Mr.. Lowrey of Lowrey, Stone & Auer-
| bach argued in favor Of the reorganization
| committee. that the question was prac-
teal and not a theoretical one. The court,
he said, had the power Of administering
the whole system, and the appointment of
a receiver was best for both systems lie
argued that Judge TOmpkins had not
showed who were the bondhoiders he repre-
! scented, and that he had afiidavits from
| none of them.
Il suspect that the real motive in the
! presentation OF this case" he said, yes,
up the reorganization plan and to
| disrupt the system. To separate
these systems under the circumstances
would be violence which l do not think
you would be liable to do"
THE BUBBLE BURSTS.
| For long time the Terminal officials had
been sitting listening to the arguments
| with apparent satisfaction and pleasure.
| Up to that minute no one had anticipated
| their intentions, no one knew what they
would do. But the time had come for them
TO act.
Addressing the court Mr.. Crawford said
| be had just filed two motions under tho
| original bill, the case of Rowena Clarke VS.
the Central Railroad and Banking Com
| pGnY The motions are as follows:
| ROwena Clarke and others VS. the Central
! Railroad and Banking Company of Georgia.
! The Rlchm nd and West Point Terminal aad
warehouse Company. one of the defendanti
| herein, moves the court to forthwith enter an
| order determining the receivershID herein, and
/ discharge the present receiver H. NJ. Toner,
| and order him to file his nual account as such
| officer HKNRY JACKSON,
HENRY CRAWFORD.
| The second motion is under the same bill
and reads:
The Richmond and West Point Terminal
| Railway and Warehouse Company moves the
! court to forthwith set aside the orders OF the
court herein entered on Jan 10 aud Jan
| Is, 1898, purporting To authorize and approve
| certain contracts dated Jan. -, 1891, between
! II. NJ. Conner receiver and II. b. Hollins &
/ Co. and the Mere lutIle Trust Company of New
| YORK, and for cause assigns:
| That said orders were improyident, and irreg-
| ular and erroneous
Toat the court had no jurisdiction whatever
4
| are utterly void. HENRY jackson,
| Henry CRAWFORD
The move is the outcome Of the disfran-
chisement of the A. 900 shares of Central
stock Owned by the Richmond Terminal
| Company, which seems to be the ground OF
their hostility to the Central and to all
efforts to reconstruct the property. The
motions are yet to be- heard by Judge Par.
| dee, and what will be the outcome Of this
endless mass Of litigation nobody knows.
MR. CRAwFoRD's SPEECH.
Mr.. Crawford did not bring out the mo-
tions until be had carried bis argument for
some little time, and as O consequence the
greater was the surprise when his intentions
were announced.
81 represent" said be, "the Richmond
Terminal Company, one Of the defendants
to the original bill filed in this court. | am
I not here To take any side whatever In this
case. but to echo what the counsel proceed
ing me has just sail, ard to enforce some
| practical justics in this complicated affair.
lit has been decided by your honors
court that the holding of $1,000 shares of
! stock by the Terminal was invalid and also
| that the lease OF the Georgia Pacific was IL
| legal and void. Your honor restrained
the company l represent from taking part
IN tho affairs and government of the road.
I'm my Judgment anything done beyond
the limits of the order III this case has been
| gross perversi0n OF your former order, and
such was the evident intent of
the tribunal when passed. The
bill filed by the stockholders was against
tae rules of equity. Possession has contin-
| ued in the courts, and the counsel is now
resisting the application upon the ground
| of practical justice. have taken the lib
eFty Of filing to-day an application to carry
| out the intent of the original order, that is
to cancel the receivership.n
CHARGES AGAINST THE COURT.
'Has the Rowena Clarke case been set
| tled!" Judge Pardee asked.
| No sir" was Mr.. era Words reply, ",he
! court has gone into copartnership with the
| reorganization committee under the bill in
| the Rowena Clarke case. and they are now
| managing affairs as they wish. The orig
lnal order has been grossly perverted. All
| OF the property has been administered since
| March OF last year. 1t has been a con-
sideratlon of the highest Importance as to
| whether there has been any call for addi-
! tional instructions TO the receivership by
! the circumstances under which the receiver
ship arose and the tenure under
which he administers and holds this
| vast property. The system is not confined
| to any particular district or any special
state. and when the state boundaries are
reached the power of the district judge
| ceases.
o
district court TO operate an interstate
system of railroads by a receiver. Vast
debts are being created, new policies
adopted, receivers obligations issued.
| and reorganization plan is
| being Matched, taken into court
and judicially issued l say it without fear OF
contradiction that this court cannot allow it
self to be sullied by receivership conducted
in that manner. This court has no power
| to administer this property for general
| purposes Still 1t has taken unto itself the
power by orders entered on application Of
the receive. to create vast volume of
debt, aud to determine what plan Of re-
organization ought to be acceptable to the
creditors and stockholders.
That bill was supplemented on July 4
| by bill in the name of the corporation
itself. The appointing OF q receiver is
provisional. The jurisdiction Of the court
is not increased or diminished by the fact
that the court has sequestered the reason Of
the controversy. Ii such a bill can be filed
there needs to be no general bankruptcy
law enScted by the United States, under
which IA corporation can avail itself Of vol
untary bankruptcy.
SHORT REVIEW OF PROCEEDINGS.
"In January last the tripartite mortgage
bonds mad fallen into default. The Farm
ers' Loan and Trust Company instituted a
bill carrying out the purpose and fact of the
original bill, still recognizing the jurisdic-
4