The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1893-07-13

also the City Water company has
failed to fulfill the purposes for which
il was created, and has forfeited all
rights conferred by or acquired under
its charter, including the right and
franchise to exist and be q corpora.
tion.
Your relator further shows that
since the 18th OF June, 1887, these
works have been in the possession
and control and dominion of another
and different company, towit: The
Austin Light and Power company,
the nominal grantee in the illegal
grants of conveyance made by the re-
spondent on the date aforesaid.
That the Austin Light and Power
company, as nominal grantee of the
City Water company, has never con-
structed or attempted to construct
any water works here, but on the con-
trary, Immediately after the taking
out of it's charter of June 2S, 1887, un-
lawfully undertook to buy and acquire
in some w9y, and did in fact
take control of the City Water COM
pany, the respondent, and since said
time has continuously had and
ment of the same.
That there is in the city of Austin
no other system of waterworks by
which the city can be supplied with
water for public or private use. That
If this system was properly managed
it can be made to render efficient ser.
vice, but said respondent is not 80
managing and operating its said plant
and system, but as above said and
stated, is unlawfully and wrongfully
given over and surrendered the pos
session, control and operation of the
same into the hands of the Austin
Water, Light and Power company,
which last named company with the
full knowledge, consent and approba-
tion of the respondent is unlawfully
aud wrongfully using the same as it's
own tor its own profit and emolument,
Wherefore your relator charges that
the said City Water company by this
act has also forfeited its charter and
its right to exist as corporation.
Premises considered, your relator
must respectfully inform the court
that the said City Wa
ter company has no longer
the right to own, control
or operate the said system of water
works or any part thereof as a corpor-
alton or to further enjoy the fran
chises or privileges granted by It's
charter. That it has violated the
constitution and laws of the state of
Texas and has disregarded, ignored
and violated its obligations as cor
poration to said state and the people
and general public ana has forfeited
it's franchised charter. Wherefore
your relator prays that the City
Water company, the respondent
herein, be cited in conformity with
the law to answer this petition. That
a Judgment be entered disolving said
corporation forfeiting it's charter and
franchises and appointing q receiver
to take control of its property and
wind up its affairs, and pending said
receivership to take charge of said
property in behalf of said state and
general public interest and behalf OF
all parties interested therein, to oper-
ate the same as contemplated under
said charter and the law until such
time as under the law and rules OF
equity the affairs of said corporation
can be legally wound up and closed
and your relator prays for all such
other or further relief, general or
special, which may be mete and proper
In the premises. A. b. BURLEsoN,
District Attorney Twenty-sixth Ju.
dicial District.
STILL ANOTHER.
Last afternoon at o'clock another
suit was filed in the same court by
City Attorney Pendexter and Fisher
& Townes for the city against the
City Water company and the Austin
Water, Power and Light company
asking judgment for RECESSION amend
ment and cancellation of the alleged
contract of the water company with