The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-08-28
A ROAD WITH TROUBLES
RECEIVERSHIP ASKED FOR NOAH J.
CLODFELTER'S ELECTRIC LINE.
Governor Mount Refuses to Take Part
in Scheme to Mandamus the
Illinois Governor.

The contracting firm Of Michael Malone
& Co. yesterday filed a petition in the Fed
eral Court asking for a receiver for the
Indianapolis, Anderson & Marion Railway
Company. The plaintiffs allege that they
have furnished materials and constructed
buildings for the company and have done
a certain amount Of grading for it. They
claim judgment for $4,000, including $1,000
attorneys fees, and declare that the COM
pany is insolvent and unable to meet it's
obligations. The petition for q receiver will
be heard before Judge Baker as soon as
he can be communicated with and time
fixed.
Noah j. Clodfelter, who is at the head Of
the electric railway, called upon Governor
Mount yesterday with papers already pre-
pared for q mandamus petition to be pre-
scented to the Federal Court asking for a
mandate compelling Governor Tanner, of
Illinois, to honor a requisition issued by
Governor Mount for Louis Enricht, of Chi
cago. Enricht was contractor for the road
and he and its promoters are in a contro-
versy about certain notes and bonds of the
company in his possession. BY making an
affidavit charging him with procuring these
securities under false pretenseS, Mr.. Clod-
felter got a requisition from Governor
Mount and instead of going straight to
Springfield to have it honOred, went to
Chicago and Enricht became aware of the
existence of the requisition; He appealed
to Governor Tanner and laid before him a
mass OF evidence. AS a result Governor
Tanner declined to issue the warrant at
the same time writing the circumstances
to Governor Mount and sending him the
papers.
The mandamus petition was prepared so
as to make Governor Mount the plaintiff
He declined to sign the petition, saying to
Mr.. Clodfelter that he had exhausted his
authority in the matter: The petition was
prepared by Judge Cahill. of Chicago, and
went on to detail the facts that the petit
toner had in due form issued his requisitlon
upon the State Of Illinois for the return to
Indiana of Louis Enricht charged with OBJ
tanning property of value under
false pretense, and that Governor
Tanner declined to issue a war
ing the court to mandate Governor Tanner
TO affix the official seal of Illinois and his
signature to the warrant Had Governor
Mount consented to appear as pla1nttt IN
the suit there might have been an inter-
state imbroglio worth mentioning.
I'm issuing the requisition, said Gov
ernor Mount yesterday, Il acted in a pure
ly ministerial capacity, caring only that the
application and affidavit were authentic and
in proper form Had d been in Governor over no
that was before him, | do not know but
that 1 should have taken the same course
The attorney general was asked about
the matter and pointed out the decision of
the Supreme Court in the case of Kentucky
against benson, governor OF ONO. IN tnlo
case the court declared that there was no
power in the Federal Courts or in Congress
to coerce the Governor of a State. The at
torney general said that if it were thought
desirable to try to sue the Governor of
Illinois. the proper form would be a suit
by the State upon relation of the attorney
general it's legal representative. He hardly
though it consistent with the dignity of
the Go ernor's office that he should engage
in such proceedings. The Governor had
reached the same conclusion by different
line of reasoning and the Governor or Hi
nois will not be sued by Indiana.
Governor Mount wrote Governor Tanner
a note in reply to the one received Wednes-
day. thanking him for his courtesy in for
warding the papers In the case and assur-
ing him that he had no fault to find with
him for exercising his judgment in the case.