The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1896-03-07

grant in the premises" and then follow
his reasons for the above application.
Which .other relief" the petitioners
understood and believed to refer TO an
Injunction against the lease. As there
are only two judgments which can be
given in such cases, the one for annul-
ment and the other for injunction, the
s'other relief must necessarily have
pointed to an injunction.
The Supreme Court granted the At
torney General leave to bring suit las
prayed for" Counsel for the Alliance
and its representatives left Raleigh
well satisfied with their case
Within a day or two the Attorney
General notified Judge Schenck that
he must confine himself to an action for
the vacation Of the charter of the North
Carolina Railroad. The Attorney Gen
erals telegram TO Judge schenck was,
do you intend to ask for restrain
l ing order or receiver in our case?
Judge Schenck replied, I'VE never
| had any idea of applying for q receiv~
/ err or embarrassing the operation OF the
| road. but only to test the validity OF
| the lease. We may ask for injunction,
| and if we cannot give the bond, 1T
might go over to the final hearing. !
| write"
| Judge Schenck, thinking that the
| Attorney General was opposed to va
| eating the charter of the N. g. il. *.
was greatly surprised to receive in re-
| ply to his telegram second telegram
| from Attorney General Osborne; to-
wit: ''Do not apply for restraining or
Ger My permission to your client IS
/ to bring an action to vacate charter
and nothing else. / refused TO grant
permission to apply for injunction. !
i will state SO to the court and ask a
dismissal of case if anything else is at
/ tempted. If the Judge does not re-
| fuse restraining order, | will require q
4 bond of fifty thousand dollars, and will
| withdraw permission if it is not given.
The course Of the Attorney General
| greatly embarrassed Judge Schenck
1 and he wrote a strong appeal to the
Attorney General, stating that the sole
object Of his clients was to test the
legality Of the lease for ninety-nine
wears, and that it was not their desire
to destroy the N. @. II. r.; that lease
| for ninety-nine years was a sale, and
so admitted to be by Judge Burwell
| in his argument before the Attorney
| General. He, likewise, reminded the
Attorney General, that after the Su-
| preme Court had signed the paper
| granting him permission to bring ac-
| ton. and after his employment of
Judge Whitaker and himself to con-
| duct the suit. that ne, the Attorney
General, said, II do not intend to al
lege in the complaint that the. lease is
invalid. TO this Judge Schenck says
he replied, "Then it is worth nothing
to as, for we cannot raise that issue
without an allegation as to its invalid
ity in the complaint"
Judge Schenck's recollection OF Mr..
Osborne's reply is, "Well, j will permit
you to bring the action in Graham's
name and manage the case to suit your
selves"
Judge Schenck says that this was
new proposition to him, and, as
Judge Clark had just stepped into the
room, he submitted it to him. Judge
Clark said, II think it is right, if it
is not, you can amend it." Attorney
General Osborne then gave Judge
Schenck q paper authorizing me to
bring suit to vacate the charter of the
N. G. II. r., but emitting the words "or
such other relief as the court may see
fit to grant" Judge Schenck main
talnS that the paper was sInply 70
confer power to bring the action as
granted by the Supreme Court and
that the Attorney General had no right
to alter their judgment. Judge Schenck
was greatly exhausted by his efforts in
behalf of his clients, and being very
feeble, he failed to examine carefully
the paper given him by the Attorney
| General
While Judge Schenck was so nobly
battling for the people of North Car
DINA, the chairman of the Alliance
Committee and David Schenck, Jr.,
were looking for private stock of the
N. G. II. r., on which to base an ac-
, | ton in case the decision of the Attor-
! | ney General might be adverse. It was