The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1895-10-03
THg~CAPIrAL,' SITUATION
Statements Made This Morning by Major
Hudson's Paper.

cision of Judge Williams in the receiver
ship suit at Wichita, involving the
4 Capital, says:
/ Judge Williams seemed very ready to
( believe that the formation of the com
pany was a fraud All the Capital has
to say to its readers on this matter at this
/ time is that the company was formed
with honorable motives to reduce the
1 papers Indebtedness, at time when its
{ profits were large and there seemed to be
/ good reason 10 expect the bust
claims against it. The present stock
holders bought their stock in good
faith and paid for ii. The attempt of an
/ individual creditor of Major Hudson to
obtain receivership for the company is
necessarily damaging to the interests of
every stakeholder as well as every cred
itor OF the company.
The following is the Wichita Eagles
report of the hearing before Judge Will
/ liams:
The matter of appointing receiver
/ for the Topeka Capital came up before
! Judge Williams in the United States
I district court yesterday and occupied
! the attention OF the court for q greater
/ part of the day.
ut looked at one time very much like
! Judge Williams intended 10 appoint re-
J
/ Baker. first mortgage, turned the tide in
/ favor of Major Hudson by putting in a
J plea that the appointment of a receiver
would de preciate the value Of the prop
| erty and endanger his security.
"'Wel, said Judge Williams, that
makes difference
at is understood by the applicants for
q receivership that the mortgages did
/ not object to the appointment of d receiy-
or md ND No. =
/ Baker, by his attorney. J. d. Mcfarland,
of Topeka, entered the objection, the at
/ torneys on the other side claimed that
/ Baker had deceived them; that he had
/ given them to understand that he did not
/ object to the appointment of a receiver.
Tine proceedings were Instituted by
! J. Z. Baker of St. Louis, who holds a
personal judgment against J. L. Hud-
| son and he made the Topeka Capital
Publishing company party to the suit
and asked that receiver be appointed
( The Capital company and J. < Hudson
were represented by r. B. Wslch, W. P.
Doutnitt aud E. S. Quinton for J. E
Baker.
Grounds for the application were
based on the grounds that Major Hudson
was the actual owner of the Capital and
that the corporation was formed for the
purpose of standing of his creditors, but
they did not sustain this charge.
! "Mr QuIntou addressed the court and
stated tnat the debs against the Capital
at one time were STA, 1871, and that at
the present time there were mortgages
and claims against them to the amount
/ $77497, and that no report had been
made since June 2 1891, and that no
| maeting Of the directors had been held
for four or five years He asserted that
J. &. Hudson and his family were draw
ing the earnings of the paper in sals-
ries and that the plant was probably
worth $50 900.
"Mr. Welch repudiated any iutimation
that Major Hudson had done any thing
but what wat right. He declared that his
reputation among the people with whom
he lived was such that no man would ac-
! cuse him of a dishonest business trausac-
tion. He stated that the Topeka Capital
company was formed N June, 1920 and
an affidavit of J. L. Hudson was read
which stated that owing to the financial
depression the property had not been
able to make more than two dividends
since that time.
HE claimed that Baker was a creditor
of an individual stakeholder and he
ought not be allowed to have a receiver
appointed because if Hudson owns this
plant as plaintiff AYERS then he has rem
edy at Law. He dec. AIRED that there were
other stockholders who had eubscri bed
and paid for stock in good faith and now
to put the Topeka Capital into the hands
OF receiver would wipe out their in
terests in it. He admitted that J. K,
Hudson had placed seventy-two shares
IN the hands of J. r. Mulvane to guar
antee the payment of mortgages.
''1Ir. Quinton answered by saying that
this proceeding was not brought against
J. &. Hudson as an Individual stock holder
but as the owner of the property. He
seemed TO think that J. K Hudson and
the Topeka Capital com Danv, were all
one and he said that the seventy-two
shares of stock had been put in Null
vAne's hands at his own request and the
! mortgages had never consented to it
nor had they agreed to relieve any claim
against the property. He claimed that
this was an equitable proceeding against
the property of Hudson and the inter
ests of no one else could be interfered
with.
"Mr. Welch stated to the court that the
corporation was paying its debts when
Judge Williams said the claim seems to
be set up that Hudson is insolvant and
the corporation solvent, and that the cor
poration was conceived in iniquity and
brought forth in SIM
He was evidently getting ready to ap-
point the receiver when c. G. Baker
entered his objection.
Judge Williams said that in order not
to prejudice the rights of the mortgag-
eos, he would not appoint a receiver at
this time, but if the mortgages were not
closed at once he would make the ap-
pointment, and s B. Isenhart was ap-
pointed master in chancery to take fur
Their testimony in the case The position
taken by Judge Williams was that he
would neither appoint receiver nor re-
fuse to appoint, but would await deveI-
opments."
Payae's Bond Forfeited
John Payne's $25 bond was declared
forfeited this morning when he failed to
appear before Judge Ferry to answer to
the charge of assaulting Frank Brad