Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1895-10-06

manner. II party desires an injuuc-
ton or recpivcdahip. he Ia not allowed
TO SCI JUDGE kilgore. hut he must 70
to Hobby, Hobby examines the papers
and advises kilgore what TO do In the
premises, and kilgorc without exatnin-
alon. does whatever Hobby says. IL
the other side desires to vacatc the In
Junction or reccivership. he cannot 20
TO the judge but must go to his deputy
Hobby and Hobby advises the Judge
what TO do or not to do. All issues
both of law and fact In equity cases.
are first tried and determined by
Hobby while the Judge merely exer-
cises kind Of appellate jurisdiction
over MIN. II Will be seen that in all
equity cases the judge has practically
abdicated In favor OF Hobby. Every
time litigant Is sent to Hobby fee
is taxed for Hobbys services. Thus
day by day the amount iNcontroversy
grows less. In this way Hobby is al
lowed to take a salary out of the pock-
cts of the litigants that will amount if
the present ratio is maintained, to ten
times that of the Judge. The parties
are not allowed to complain of Hobby's
charges but are peremptorlly ordered
to pay them or go to Jail
The record In cause No. 1851, on the
Ardmore docket entitled Armour Bros.
Banking Co. VS.. j. r. Addington ct al,
Illustrates the workings of this meth
cd. Samuel Davidson owned about
seven hundred head of beef steers in
the Chickasaw Nation. j. S. Adding
ton owned a small herd of cattle and
some horses In the Chickasaw Nation,
but they We're covered by a mortgage
to w. III. Featherston to secure a note
for $4,000, payable to j. II. Sands. and
upon which Featherstone and w. b.
Worsham were secureties. Armour
Bros. Banking Co. having a large judg-
ment against j. p. Addington, who
was insolvent. filed a complaint under
sections 30Si to BOSS of Mansfield's Di-
gest for the discovery of assets The
complaint alleged that the Davidson
steers belonged to ]. p. Arlington but
that Davidson was wrongfully assert
ing claim to them, and that the other
property belonged to j. p. Addington
but that j. S. Arlington and w. II.
Featherston We're wrongfully claiming
1t. The complaint asked for the APP
pointment of a receiver and was veri-
fed by the ex parte affidavit of one of
plaintiffs attorney. The complaint
was filed June 2lst, 1896 and was pre-
sented to Hobby, and upon the same
day Hobby advised the Judge to grant
the prayer and wrote the order APP
pointing a receiver, which the Judge
signed without reading. No notice
was given to the defendants or any
one else. The defendants were per-
emptorlly ordered to surrender the
property to the receiver. Samuel
Davidson and w. II. Featherston filed
their sworn answers as required of
them by statute, denying that ]. p.
Addington had any interest in the
property and alleging their own in
terest therein. In addition to this,
they procured numerous afiidavits
showing that j. p. Addington had no
interest in the property and showing
that the beef steers belonged TO Sam
uel Davidson and the other property
to j. S. Addlngton, subject, however,
to the Featherston mortgage. To
this answer was attached n copy of the
mortgage, and the proper allegations
were made In reference to the mort
gage debt being unpaid, etc.
AS attorney for the defendants, /
filed applications in behalf of Davidson
and Featherston to vacate the receiver
ship, and went to Ardmore to present
the same. The judge was absent, hav-
ing gone to Washington, as l was In
formed, to Interfere in the race for
marshal. / was told that | would be
required to first present my papers TO
Hobby. The case had not been trans
ferred to Hobby and had not reached
that stage when 1t could lawfully be
referred to the master, Franklin VS..
Meyer, SO Ark. l09. Hicks VS.. Hogan,
SO Ark. 29S. When / saw Hobby, the
plaintiff claimed not to be ready and
he declined to hear the applications,
but did not set the case for any day.
Some time after this, received let
ter from plaintiffs attorneys stating
that they would be ready to hear the
case on the following Monday. | was
at Ardmore at the appointed time and
tried to get Hobby to hear the case
on the answers afildavits and defects
in the complaint, but to my astonlsh-
ments he held that the applications
could nnt ha hoard or
Wits and defects, but that | would have
to produce my clients and witnesses
and allow him to examine them orally.
| asked him where he got his au-
thorlty for that course of procedure. He
said 1t was rule of court. / asked
him If that rule was in force at the
time he advised the receivership ON the
eN parte affidavit of plaintiffs attor-
ney. He said nothing. | told him that
1t was absurd to talk about trying
case twice and that il he could not
hear the case on the answers, afiidaVits
and deficiencies. to send II to the Judge
with such advice as he thought proper,
for / did not think the case was right
fully before him, Hobby, anyway.
l think these remarks We're unfur-
tunate upon my part. and explains
much that has since been done by
Hobby In the case, He wrote out his
advice to the judge against vacating
the recelvership and | thought that
ended the matter, but after / left for
home he issued attachments for my
clients and subpoenas for witnesses
showing an intention to try the APP
pllcations to vacate the receivershlp
upon oral testimony.
Judge Kilgore was detained a great
while at Washington In reference to
the race for marshal His return was
daily expected. and made five or six
trips to Ardmore in the hope of seeing
him so as to present my applications.
/ had offered. when / was last before
Hobby, after failing to get n hearing
on the applications, TO give bond and
security to pay the value of the prop
erty In case II should be ever held
liable for j. p. Addington's debts. Hob
by seemed disposed to grant this re-
quest, but plaintiffs attorneys told him
that If my clients were allowed to get
possession of the property. they would
delay the trial. and that the only wav
to force them to a speedy trial was
to hold the property. Hobby seemed
to agree with them. and refused to
advise the Judge To allow my clients
to have their property upon giving
bond for II.
When Judge Kilgore returned from
his labors In Washington he went to
White sulphur springs for his health,
and while there. without anv nntica