The morning call., 1894-10-31
Fight for Control of the
Santa Fe.
TRACEY IN THE BREACH.
He Appears for the Opposition
Stockholders.
WHO WRECKED THE PROPERTY.
The Trouble Was i'm the Foreign
Management Attempting to
Run 1t at Long Range.

TOPEKA, Kan. Oct. 30.-In the United
States Court this morning Judge Foster
decided that the Injunction proceedings
brought against the Santa Fe stockb olders
to prevent them holding an election ex-
cept by cumulative ballot must be dis
missed as TO the nonresident defendants.
but that the injunction must hold as to the
Kansas defendants.
The courtroom was filled with interested
spectators when Judge Foster opened
court and asked that one of the stenogra-
piers present furnish the clerk with a
copy of his decision, to be filed as part of
the court record.
Judge Foster said that this company
was under the act of 1888 defining the dis
trict in which suit may be brought. and
in accordance with that act the suit may
be brought either in the district where the
plaintiff resides or in the district where
the defendants reside. The Injunction
proceedings were then ordered dismissed
as to the nonresident defendants, B. z.
Cheney. }. A. Blair OF New York and ID.
Is. Robinson of Illinois, they being the
only nonresident stockholders which had
been served with processes of court.
Judge Foster announced that as far as
the Kansas defendants, Z. K. Holiday, c.
S. Gleed, Z. Wilder and l.. Seyery, are
concerned the Injunction must hold and it
was so ordered. The attorneys for the
defendants asked for an extension of time
until 2 p. NJ. that they might amend the
evidence they wished to file before pro-
ceeding with the argument of the case on
its merits. They said it WAS necessary TO
| amend their evidence on account of the
decision of the court to which they wished
to conform. General Tracey said he was
opposed to any dilatory proceedings, but
the adjournment to P NJ was finally con-
sented to.
The afternoon session opened promptly.
Mr.. Woolman was first to occupy the at
tention of the court with the introduction
of the plaintiffs evidence. 1t consisted of
number of extracts from the first volume
Of printed records, documents and papers
prepared by the Santa Fe Company. Mr..
Woolman made brief statement for the
plaintiffs side. in which he said it would
be shown that nearly every right the COM
| pany was enjoying had been granted by
the State, and that by accepting these sub
| seQuent enactments the road had practi-
| cally abandoned its original charter, and
had no right in law to cling to the old
| provisions regulating voting.
| An affidavit from Mr.. c. S. Gleed,
one of the defendant receivers
was introduced which declared that
the Santa Fe had never declared
| itself a corporation under the laws
of Kansas, and always claimed that it ex-
isted uGder its Territorial charter. He de-
3ied that the Kansas defendants In the
present action were consDiring or DESTROYS
| of controlling the stockholders meeting;
| he affirmed that only SIG shares out of the
| 102, 600, 900 were owned by the Two defend
ants named and that they could therefore
accomplish very little if they desired to
control the meeting; he denied that the de-
PENDANTS had refused the plaintiffs any
| rights and that the defendants were not
trying to perpetuats themselves in office
he claimed that the defendants only de-
| sired to assist In carrying out in the cleo
ton the unbroken usage of the thirty-fve
years existence of the company and
affirmed that the plaintiff was setting ND
claim 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 be
physical as we'll as a legal impossibility to
do so il they did desire, as this stock was
In the CUSTODY OF the receivers.
Mr.. Dunlap then read an affidavit from
Edward Wilder, treasurer of The Santa Fs,
in which he denied that by availing itself
of the laws of the State the company be-
came a corporation of the State, and
affirmed that the officers and company had
always complied with the rights and
privileges of their charter and never ac.
ce pied any law conflicting with the charter
He affirmed that the provisions Of the
charter in regard 10 the voting oil stock
had always been complied with, and de-
MED the desire or intention of the de-
PENDANTS to vote the company's stock.
General B. F. Tracy made the argument
for the plaintiff. 1t was a thorough pre-
sentation of the one central point claimed
by the prosecution, which is that, although
the Territorial charter granted to the origi-
nal Santa Fe Company did not provide for
cumulative voting, the company had ac-
cepted subsequent legislation enacted by
The State Legislature. and that by so doing
became amenable TO all the statute laws
governing such corporation, and conse-
Quently that the latter legislation provid-
ding for cumulative voting should govern,
and not the provisions of the old charter.
General Tracy said he had cited abundant
authority In his brief to sustain this posi-
ton, and it only remained 10 determine
whether this company had accepted cor
porate powers from the State Legislature.
! He closed by saying that the wreck of the
Santa Fe road was caused not by residents
OF this country, but by foreign manage
ment attempting to control the corpora
ton.
At the conclusion of General Tracy's
| nj int for
until tomorrow morning ct 10 o'clock