The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-11-01

primary jurisdiction. 70 which they were
20 account, they were confirmed II ths-r
belief by the acquiescsnce Of the other
courts implied by the absence Of any de-
r7azld 10 the contrary.
No Want of Respect.
II Is alleged rnat the order appointing
them in the District OF Washington con
tasrIef no provision requiring them 70 ae-
count 10 aslfs court. as they understood IL
The receivers claim that UP until August
y they had flied no accounts In any OF the
circuit courts except in that for the East
ern district Of wisconsin. They submit 70
the court whether, IN view OF all the facts
stated. they are fairly chargeable with
want Of respect 70 this court. and neglect
OF duty to Il. for having treated the court
of WISCONSIN as the court OF primary Ju-
risdi-tion. and say that they would have
furnished their reports 70 all Of the courts
had they been advised that such was their
duty.
Why They Resigned.
II is alleged that ny the action taken BY
Judge Hanford Sept enber =. 1895. they u1-
dersfood that he would thereafter not rec
ognize the Wisconsin court as OF primary
Jurisdiction. but asserted fer himself such
Jurisdiction and would require the re-
ceivers to account 10 him and take orders
from him concerning the entire trust. as
the court Of primary Jurisdiction There
upon" says the answer without fear
of charges that had heen alleged against
them. suddenly placed in a position of
obvious complication and difficulty grow
ing oat Of the differing opinions upon the
question OF jurisdiction and impressed
with the conviction that under such cir
cumstances even If desired by ell parties
10 continue in the trust they could not do
so with justice to themselves they re-
solved to resign. and on September 2, 1895,
rendered their designations TO the W;scon-
sin court, which had first appointed them.
The respondents then give in full their
designations. which take up sixteen pages
OF typewriter matter. They say that the
designations were rendered in good faith;
That the order of time in which the resig-
nations should be presented TO the other
courts was left TO counsel. and that the
intention was 10 have accompany the brief
and formal resignation a copy Of the resig-
nation filed with The Wisconsin court, so
that the judge of each court should know
the reasons for their action, and should
be advised that enc OF the purposes of their
resignation WAS that they should he ena-
hled TO avoid even the appearance of con-
tumacy toward any of the courts
The receivers say that since they resign
ed they have been separated from coun-
sci. but they understood that their resig-
nations would be accepted by the several
courts They expected that on October 2
the reasons for their resigna tons and the
fact that they intended no contumacy and
were anxious 10 avoid even the appear
ance OF disobedsencs, would he brought 10
the attention of this court, and that under
the circumstances of difficulty and en-
barrassment in which they were placed by
the sudden and unexpected change in tbs.
situation of the litigation, the court would
give further indication OF its wishes and
demands, and give them further time
within which to comply; that their counsel
was called suddenly to the West by tele-
graph: that a copy Of the resignation was
forwarded TO him by mail but he did not
receive St. The position i'm which they were
uninteDtfonally placed by their counsel be-
fore the court on October 2. of a determin-
aston not TO comply with the order of the
court, was not in accordance with their
spirit or purpose and they disclaim any
want or respect for the court, or any in
tention Of being in contempt thereof. or
OF disobeying ITS otders or DEGREES.
The Monthly Accounts.
The receivers bring into court reports
or their accounts for May June July and.
August, having heretofore filed reports
for March and April: and they say the
report for September will he fled as soon
as prepared by the accounting officers.
The turnts over of the property of the
company't to Andrew F. Burleigh. in The
districts where he has been appointed re-
ceiyer. is then given. and to f. H. Nc
Henry and Bigelow for Wisconsin, Mime
sofa and North Dakota
Payne in Europe.
Cakes and Rouse. who have signed the
answer say than the reason why = is not
signed by Payne is that he had been for
many months in failing health. was
obliged by the command Of his physician
to abstain from all business transactions
and for that reason had to go abroad
where he now is.
Want Removal Order Revoked
They therefore claim that they have
been guilty of no contempt; that they have
purged themselves Of apparent contumacv.
and pray that they he discharged They
also ask that Judge Hanford revoke his
order of October 2. removing them as re-
Ceivers. and that in lieu chereof an order
be made accepting their designations
Some of the Figures
In the reports fled for May June. July
and August, the old receivers give the fol-
| lowing figures:
May