The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1893-02-12
PORT ROYAL ROADS CONTROL
The Celebrated Cases Heard in Court
at Charleston.


CHARLESTON, S. c., Feb. 1.-THE cele-
brated Port Royal railroad cases, involving
the receivership OF Mr.. Conner, as we'll as
the validity Of the lease of the road to the
Central OF Georgia, occupied the undivided
attention OF Judge Aldrioh in the state
circuit court frem o'clock this morning
until a very late hour tonight, Two cases
were heard. one brought by the state to
invalidats the lease to the Central, and
another by A, g. King of Atlanta and 9TH
ers 30 invalidate Mr.. Corners appointment
as receiver, and TO appoint j. H. Averill
as receiver of the Port Royal road. There
was a distinguished array Of counsel
The attorney general was assisted by
Smythe g. Lee OF this city in behalf the
state. while W. }. Verdier Of Beaufort and
Il. b. King OF Atlanta represented the
plaintiffsin the other suit. The defendants,
the Port Royel railroad, and the receiver,
Mr.. Conner, we're represented by Maj.
Joseph Ganahl of Augusta, Mitchell &
Smith OF this city and Henry G. Cunning
ham and s. B. Adams OF Savannah. The
suit was hotly contested, the engagement
being opened by motion made by the de-
PENDANTS for postponement Of the
hearing. This was opposed by the
state and after a considerable
argument the court refused the motion for
a continuance. and the first case was or
dered to be taken up. that of the state
against the Port Royal railroad and H. NJ.
Conner.
The pleadings we're first read. The com
plant, briefly stated, is that under Receiver
Comer's management the Port Royal road
is being operated in violation OF its charter
rights, contrary 70 public policy and against
the laws of the state. The petitioners pray,
therefore, that the road be taken out Of the
control Of the Central railroad and placed
permanently in the hands of a temporary
receiver, j. H. Averill, or that the
charter of the Port Royal railway in South
Caroline be Annulled. Annexed TO the COM
plants are a number of Rftidavits from citi-
zens in Augusta, Ca. Allendale, Beaufort
and Port Royal, testifying that the road
has been in worse condition aud more un-
satisfactorily operated since Receiver Conner
took charge than ever before. Objection
was made to the introduction Of these atfi-
davits, but they were admitted subject to
exceptions.
ANSWER OF THE ROAD.
The answer of the Port Royal railroad
was next read, iu which the allegations of
the complaint are, Of course, denied. It
contends that the Port Royal road is now
In the hands OF a receiver appointed by
the United States court, and that grave
federal questions are involved which should
properly be argued and settled In the federal
courts.
The argument which followed lasted for
four hours and was participated ia by all
the counsel in turn. II. A. M. Smith
opened for the defendants. All the mate
rial allegations in the complaint he said.
were made on information and belief Of
Attorney General Townsend. There was
no evidence TO support this. He argued
that there were federal questions involved
which should con44 up before the United
States court. One was the question whether
the Central Railroad and Banking Company
has the right under the law Of Georgia TO
hold stock in the Port Royal and Augusta
railroad.
Mr.. Ganahl followed on the same side,
Attorney General Townsend was next
heard for the state, and was followed by Mr..
Smythe, who said the Central railroad had
tried to gobble up the Port Royal road and
stitie competition. The sale of the bonds Of
the Port Royal road to the Central was an
unlawful act, and it was the right Of the
attorney general to 60 into equity to seek
relief from the evils complained Of by an
injunction and the appointment Of a re-
ceiver.
The argument was closed by Mr.. Ganshl
OF Augusta for the Port ROYAL
road. He argued that under the
act of 1885 the Central Railroad and
Banking Company had full power to
purchase all kinds of stocks and bonds
The charter was renewed in 1870 and In
1872 the constitution was adopted prohibit
ing such purchases. But that constitution
did not repeal the charter and the banking
powers Of the Central Railroad aud Bank
ing Company. Competition, he argued,
was not the life Of railroads; it was de-
struction to them.
At the close of Mr. Ganahl's argument
the court took the papers and a recess till 3
o'clock p. M, when the ''Kingn suit was
argued.
It will probably be several days before a
decision is announced, as the authorities
cited by both sides are voluminous. The
same issues are to be argued bsfors the
United States court on Feb. 81.