The herald., 1894-10-31
SOME RAILROAD RuMBLIHGS.
The Santa Fe Case in Court at
Topeka.
Arguments on the Subject of Gu
mulative Voting.
Proceedings Dismissed as to Non. r T.
dent Defendnnts--Thei Company
Wrecked by Foreign
Management.
BY the Associatad Press.

BY the Associated Press.
Topeka, Kan, Oct. 30.-Iu the United
States court this morning, Judge Foster
decided that the injunction proceedings
brought against the Santa Fe stock
holders to prevent them from holding ar
election except by cumulative ballot
must be dismissed as to the non-residen'
defendants. but that the injunction must
hold as to the Kansas defendants.
The court room was filed with inter
ssted spectators when Judge Foster
opened court, and asked that one of the
ssenogrsphers present furnish the clerk
with copy Of his decision to be fled ae
q part OF the court record.
Judge Foster said that this com pany
came under the act OF 1888. defining the
district in which suit may be brought
as the district where the plaintiff re-
sides or in the district whore the defend.
ants rseide.
The motion to dismiss the injunction
proceedings wss then ordered dismissed
aa to the nonresident defendante, B. +.
Cheney, J. A. Blair, OF New York, end
D. B. Robinson, OF Illinois, they being
the only non-resdent stockholders
which had been served with processea
of the court.
Judge Foster then announced that as
far IS the Kansas defendants, .. K. Hcl.
lidsy, O. s. Gleed, E. Wilder and l..
Severely, are concerned, the injunction
must hold, and il was SO ordered.
The attorneys for the defendants then
aaked for an extension OF time until 2
p. M, that they might amend the evil
dence they wished to file before pro-
ceeding with the argument OF the case
on it's merits. They said it was neoeE-
ssry to amend their evidence, on &C
count OF the decision Of the court, to
which they wished to conform.
General Tracy said be was opposed to
any dilatory proceedings, but the ad-
tournament TO 2 p. m. wac finally con-
sentsd to.
The afternoon session opened prompt.
ly. MIR. Woolman was first to occupy
the attention Of the court with the in<
PRODUCTION OF the plaintiffs evidence. 1t
consisted Of a number OF extracts from
the first volume OF printed records, doe
umsnts and papers prepared by the
Santa Fe company. MIR. Wcolman
made brief statement for the plain
tiffa' side, in which he said it would be
shown that nearly every right the COM
pany wae enjoying hsd been granted by
the state, and that by accepting these
enactments. the road had practically
abandoned its original charter, and had
no right in law to cling to the old pro.
viaiona rAgulating the yotinc
An affidavit from G. S. Gleed, one OF
the defendant receivers, wac rssd, which
declared that the Santa Fe had never
declared itself corporation under the
laws of Kansas. cad alwaps cIeimed
that it existed under its territorial char
ter. He denied that the Kansas defend
ants in the present action were conspir
ing or desiroun of controlling the stock
holders meeting. He affirmed that
emily 316, 900 shares cut Of the 102, 600 900
we're owned by the four defendants
named, apd that they could therefore
accomplish very littls il they desired to
control the meeting. He died that the
defendants had refused the plain ii ffs any
rights and that the defendants were not
trying 80 perpetuste themselves ia Office.
He claimed that the defendants only de-
sired to assist in carrying out in the
election the unbroken usage OF the So
years. existence OF the company, and
affirmed that the plaintiff was setting up
claim to right that WAS contrary to
the charter and bylaws of the company.
He denied that the defendants desired
or intended to vote the treasury stock,
and said it would phyaica as we'll aa a
legal impossibility to do 90 if they did
desire il, as this stock was in the GUS
tody of the receivers.
Mr.. Dunlap then read an affidavit
from Edward Wilder, treasurer of the
Santa Fe, in which he denied that, by
availing itself OF che laws OF the state,
the company became q corporation of
the ptste, and affirmed that the officers
and company had always complied with
the rights and privileges OF their char
ter and never accepted any law conflict
ing with the charter. He affirmed that
the voting OF stock had always been
complied with, and denied the desire
or intention of the defendants to vote
the company stock.
Gen. B. F. Tracy made the argument
for the plaintiff. 1. was q thorough
presentation of the one central point
cihimSu NY tho pIosocuuon, Wnlon
is that. although the territorial
charter granted to the original
Santa Fe company did not provide for
cumulative voting, the company had ac.
cspted subsequent legislation. and that
by so doing became amenable to all the
statute laws governing such a corpora.
ton, and consequently the latter legis-
laticn providing for cumulative voting,
and not the provisions Of the old charter
General Tracy said he had cited
abundant authority in his brief to Gus
tain this position, and it only remained
to determine whether the company hao
accepted corporate powers from the state
legislature.
General Tracy closed by saying thai
the wreck of the Santa Fe road wal
cauaed, not By residents of this country