The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1897-01-21
ANOTHER SUIT FILED
By the City Against the Water
Company.
One More Link in the Endless
Chain of Litigation.
Attorneys Now Seek to Forfeit the
Franchise Granted the Orig
inal Company.

City Attorney Bird has taken a new
turn at the Topeka Water company in
a case which has just been filed in the
supreme court. He has commenced
quo warranto proceedings to forfeit the
franchise granted the old company by
the city.
If Mr.. Bird carries his point the suit
will leave the company at the mercy
of the citizens of Topeka.
The city attorney will try to reach
the water company under the corpora
ton laws of the state which he claims
are being violated by it.
The state law governing corporation
requires that every company DONG
business in Kansas must have head
quarters here and elect the directors in
the state.
1t is claimed that the Topeka Water
company has not kept its general Of
fees in Kansas since 1880, when the
original company sold out and the head
quarters were moved to Chicago.
The water company has been sold I'M
der mortgage foreclosure and the new
company was recently chartered in
New Jersey and the city attorney
claims that the corporation is farther
from the jurisdiction of the state than
ever before.
One of the most important conten-
tions in the petition filed by the city
attorney is that a franchise given by a
city is something that cannot be hawk
He claims that the franchise OF the
water company could not be legally
sold with the plant and that the cor
poration has, consequently, no claim
upon the city through franchise, be
cause it was forfeited when the hrSt
transfer was made.
1t is also claimed that the franchise
could not be mortgaged. There is now
an Indebtedness of $1,000 600 on the plant
which includes the franchise. 1t is
claimed that the purpose of loading the
company up with this enormous IN
debtednesS was to remove 1t from the
control of the state laws and city or
The city is given the option of pur-
chasing the plant in about ten years,
at the expiration of the present fran
chise. and the Indebtedness becomes an
important factor. The plant is alleged
not worth over $500 600 and if pur-
chased the city would be com
PEELED to face an indebtedness of almost
Indebtedness will have to be taken care
of if the city decides to purchase and
the city will have it to pay, or be com
PEELED to extend the franchise.
These are the questions to be settled
by the new suit brought by Mr.. Bird
If the company has been violating the
state law the franchise may be declared
forfeited and then the city would be
free to build it's own plant or make pet
ter terms with the present company
The water works litigation has pc
come almost a standing joke in Topeka
A suit to forfeit the franchise of the
company was commenced nearly five
years ago in the Shawnee county dis
trict court Then began the delays
which no one but an attorney can ac-
count for and which dragged the case
along until last fall, when it was finally
heard before Judge Thompson of Bur
Hngame, who decided against the city
That case was appealed to the supreme
court and advanced on the docket SO
that it will be heard in May.
Mr. Bird says that this second sult
spot. He hopes to avoid the delays
which have characterized the other lltl-
cation and will make a motion to have
the case advanced at once.