The comet. (Johnson City, Tenn.) 1884-1916, 1893-11-16
THE SUIT SETTLED.
Full Text Of the Action Of the Supreme
Court il the 3.C's Suif.

Mcdonald, Shea u Co. ct ais. W
Charleston. Cincinnati & ChicAgn r.
r. Co. et ala, from Washington This
is suit hv McDonsld, Shea & Co.
and William Ketcfck, CONTAGIOUS,
against the 3 C's II X Co. and the
Massac chusetts and Southern Cunstruc-
ton Co. to .ecover the amount due
them for constructing a part OF the
Sos road lying in Tennessee, aud to
have their debts declared lien ON the
railroad. The most important question
in the case, rs it appears in the Su
preme Court on appeal, is whether the
railroad company and the Construc-
ton Co. are in law one and the same
and, il go, it follows that the tontrac-
tors, Mcdonald, Shea & Co. and VIM.
Kenefick, are original contractors and
entitled to the lien, given by the law
of this State to ofiglna. contractors, on,
the railroad constructed The parties
are numerous, the amounts involved
very great and the record contains ten
volumes, 1000 pages, and there are
many aspects Of the case. The consoli-
dated causes we're heard before the
Chancellor ON the 29th of July, 1892,
when he decreed, among other things
1st. That the railroad and construc-
ton companies are both insolvent and
must be wound up as insolvent corpo-
rations.
2. That the mortgage to secure the
bonds was invalid as to that portion OF
the road in Tennessee, for want Of au.
thority to execute the same.
8 That the contracts between Nc
Donald, Shea 4 Go ,and VIM. Kenefck
to construct the road were virtually
and in fact contracts between them
and the railroad andsconstruction com.
pany as one person, and that they
have lien on the road for the amount
due them.
4. That the amount due Mcdonald,
Shea & Company was $476, ,207. AS, to
VIM. Kenefick $105,32116.
5. That the judgment for $715,-
841 IA against the railroad company in
favor of Construction Company was in
valid as against creditors OF railroad
company.
The road was sold under this decree
and brought 100000. This fund was
ordered to be paid out, 1st for taxes,
End for costs and expenses OF receiver
ship, 3rd for amounts due for rights of
way, whether held by original owners,
by assignment or subrogatioo, 4th pro
rata among the lien creditors in equal
degree after the right of way claims.
It appears that the construction
, company is Massachusetts, corpora
} ton with capital OF $3.50, 10000, or
, ganized with the specific purpose oI
building railroad from Charleston S
O., to the Ohio river, to cost about
twenty million dollars, and that il
9 planned, originated and organized thu
1 railroad company after It's own organi
; zation, controlled its stockholders
meetings, dictated its hoard OF direc
tors, took It's board stock and bonds
0 paid out its aesets, raised and expend
Q ed its money; sthat Harris the presi
9 dent of the construction company
controlled and dictated the operation
It OF both companies that the genera
It manager, treasurer, auditor and ever,
Q officer taking an active part in escl
company was the same and at th
l. same time. These things together wit
Il the contract between the CONSTRUCTION
e and railroad companies force the cour
l. to the conclusion that the construt
% ton company was corporation fo
of the purpose of negotiating contrac.
of and floating stocks and bonds of th
railroad company. The only specifics
ton in the contract between them