The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-09-03

Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin is
held not to be the court of primary jurisdiction
over the property in receivership, such primary
jurisdiction falls either to the Circuit Court for
the Western District OF Wisconsin, in whose jur-
isdiction portion of the company's railroad
lies, and in which the receivers were appointed
before they were appointed by this court, or to
the Circuit Court for the Southern District of
New York, in which is located the home Office
of the corporation and large portion of it's
personal property. We see no grounds upon
which the court should decline to hear the
motion which is presented The objection to
the jurisdiction will be overruled
Judge Hanford supplemented the de-
cision by saying:
eve think that it is necessary that the
receivers before any further action is
taken should be called upon to make full
answer to the affidavit of Brayton Ives"
In the discussion which followed as to
the time when this reply should be made
ex-United States Senator John B. Allen of
counsel for the Farmers Loan and Trust
Company ga trustee interested in the Sc
curlties of the Northern Pacific" as he ex-
pressed it), suggested to the court that the
date should be set some time ahead in
order that his clients might not be rushed
in the premises. To this the court made
caustic reply, saying:
"My idea about it is that the court ought
to proceed summarily in this matter. OF
course a fair chance to be heard must be
accorded, but this is not a case in which
to go cropping and searching for facts.
The facts are necessarily within the knowl-
edge of the individuals who have to make
answer, and they cannot leave employed
counsel to go scraping facts. They are
called upon now to act. This trustee (the
Farmers Loan and Trust Company has
nothing to answer except to the charges
that it acted in collision with Willard and
Cromwell. The trustee must repose con-
fidence in the courts to give the protection
which the law gives these securities. A
decision Of the court for or against one
party. if it is according to law, is not GO
ing to bull or bear these stocks.
"The best security and the best support
that can be given to the values of these
securities is to have courts that will obey
the law and compel the parties who are
brought into litigation to obey the law too.
Now, for the Farmers Loan and Trust
Company, for the purpose of protecting
the securities, to assume that it has to be-
come partisan of Mr.. Cakes or Mr.. Payne
with the idea that if anybody else in the
world is placed in position as agent OF
the court to handle this property it is GO
ing to raise or lower the value of these
securities. is a fallacious idea
Judge Hanford set October 2 as the date
when Receivers Cakes, Payne and Rouse
may file their answer to the affidavit OF
Brayton Ives. United States Senator John
s. Spooner, counsel for the receivers, made
vigorous fight for longer time in which
to make answer to which Colonel Silas w.
Petit, general counsel of the Northern
Pacific Railway Company, retorted that if
the receivers were attending to their bust
ness instead of junketing about the coun-
try so much time would not be needed.
Leading lawyers of the State were in at
tendance upon court when the decision
was read. The Farmers Loan and Trust
Company of New York was represented by
Strive, Hughes, Allen & McMicken, q
firm working in conjunction with the
counsel for the receivers. Colonel Petit
was assisted by Samuel H. Piles and Har-
old Preston in the great legal battle.