The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1893-04-11
THE PORT ROYAL CASE,
ARGUMENTS PRESENTED BEFORE
JCDGB PARDBE.

A Number OF Wellknown and Able
Attorneys Present at the bearing.
The Argumsnts Concluded and the
Decision Expected To-day-The sa-
vanneh and Western Case to Come
Up This Morning,
There was quite an array Of able legal
talent in the United States court room yes
terday to take part in the argument for and
against the petition of j. H. Averill. asking
that Mr.. Conner be displaced as receiver Of
the Port Royal aud Augusta railroad aud
that Col. Averill be appointed.
The plaintiff was represented by Mai. a.
T. Smythe OF Charleston and A. C. King,
Esq, Of Atlanta, while Lawton & Cunning
ham, Denmark & Adams and Maj. Joseph
Ganahl of Augusta were there in behalf of
the defendants Besides these there were
present Maj. j. C. c. Black OF Augusta,
Hon. Pope Barrow, Lowery, Stone &
Auerbach for the reorganization committee,
L. NJ. Erwin, Esq, OF Macon and several
other prominent attorneys.
OPENED FOR THE PLAINTIFF.
Maj A. T. Smythe of Charleston opened
GI4o kullcuL AOT Tie pihlut!lIs dlHkln& LLAs
Mr. Conner was appointed receiver illegally
and without the Jurisdiction of the court.
He stated that the road was not insolvent,
and that therefore a receiver should not
have been appointed.
Maj. Joseph Gauahl argued for the de-
fendant, and as followed by Capt. II. G.
Cunningham. The defense stated that il
the Port Royal road was not iasolvent it
YVES nevertheless a fact that it had not paid
ha fnto 20 bonds fka.a fv,r
since 1891. at which time It went into the
hands OF the Central.
CAPT. CUNNINGHAM CONNECTED.
1.-THE main question. however," Capt.
Cunningham stated, lis whether it was
within jurisdiction of the United States
court TO appoint receiver for the Port
Royal and Augusta. You have put the
Central Ia the hands Of receiver under the
bill filed in behalf of Rowena NJ Clarke"
Il beg to correct Capt. Cunningham"
said Judge Pardee. 81 found the road in
the hands of a receiver, and left 1t there"
"Well it was placed there by the United
States court at any rate, replied Capt.
Cunningham. "The Port Royal road is
not asking TO be put in the hands of Mr..
Averill as receiver. but the road itself is
before this court az q defendant, and as a
road desires TO rem ain where it is The
Port RoYa is not objectng to the receiver
ship of Mr.. Conner, but the objection comes
from a stockholder in that road who owns
but 766 shares out Of 22,5O0."
Capt Cunningham then showed by cita-
lions from othsr rulings, that where a road
wns In charge of the United States court
IL was not proper to remove il, but plain
tifTs should come before that court for an
adjudication of their rights. The Central,
he said, owned q ma ority OF the stocks and
bonds OF the Port Royal, and as owner of
the property the Central and the Port
Royal. which was part Of the system, should
have the same receiver.
MR.. ADAMS CONCLUDES FOR THE CENTRAL.
Mr.. Adams, in behalf of tie Central rail-
road, stated that the only question before
the court was one Of a change in receivers
The question was. he sed as to which was
the right holder of the property. Among
other things he stated that the Central
owned the majority Of the stock and bonds
of the road, while the petitioner before the
court represented only 766 shares OF
stock. Under these circumstances the road
should remain in the hands of the receiver
who was receiver for the entire Central
system.
Mr.. Alex G. King Of Atlanta closed the
argument for the plaintiff. He snid that
Judge Roney appointed Mr.. Averill receiver
OF the road and directed him 20 apply to
this court for possession Of it. He denied
that the criticismS OF Maj. Ganahl and Mr..
Adams we're pertinens to the jurisdiction of
the court in the case. aud stated that the
Central was in the same position as any other
stocHholder in the road and should DO sub
ject to the same conditions and amenable to
the same laws. MIR. Kings argument was
q strong one and full of interesting points
TO COME UP TODAY.
The court then adjourned until this morn.
ing at 10:30 whom il viii meet again TO hear
the petition in the case Of the Central Trust
Company of New York vs. the Central
Railroad and Banking Company asking
for an independent receiver for and sepa.
rate foreclosure OF the Savannah and Vest
est system.
Judge Pardee is expected to render his
decision in the Averill case to-day, though
he may reserve it for consideration. His
decision affects only the eight miles Of the
road in Georgia, the remainder being con-
trolled by Judge Simonton in the South
Carolina court.