The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1899-07-09

specification in detail is made OF many
wrongs and derelictiona, all OF which are
! alleged to be unlawful and hurtful to the
| public welfare. Briefly stated, the grounds
| of complaint charged by the State are rs
follows:
| l. The defendant has consolidated un-
der one control and management, IA num-
Der of parallel and competing lines In the
State, which forbids the consolidation OF
parallel and competing lines.
2. 1t threatens to violate the same sec
| ton of the constitution by consolidating
with the Sherman, Shreveport and South
ern railway. declared by the supreme court
OF Texas TO be 4 competing line.
g. 1t is consolidated with AMI controlled
and dominated by the Missouri. Kansas
| and Texas Railway compalJ, Kansas
corporation. in violation OF section s. arti-
Gle TO- of tho constitution.
L. 1t has issued q large amount of ncti-
tious stocks and bonds in violation of sec
ton g. article IL, OF the constitution OF
this state, which declares all ich indebt-
edneas TO be void.
5. That by Illegal management 1t has
become naolvent unable to earn lntereet
an1 other expenses as sworn to bv it's
| officers In the comin'ss'on cases at Dallas.
| That i majority u toe directorg, re-
| qulrst by law to reside In Texas, arc no.
iona tide.
| Z. 1t has uplawfully Absorbed rni IN
| par, operates the ualves'on. Houston and
| Henderson railroad
| A great many OF tho facts alleged IL
these several counts can be established by
documentary evidence about which there
can be no dispute. and assert that. In my
judi ment. every Imp liant allegation can
b.. established by compatest anl sufficient
testimony at hand. Conditions have not
changed since the filing of this suit.
. bn .hI1 ftnf thA fata iu pnt
acting in good faith with respect TO those
features Involving the legislation OF 1891.
] believe that the first count alone in
wolves the legislation OF 1891, and elimi-
mating this feature altogether there are
abundant causes left to Justify this litiga-
ton. Besides, there can be no merit In
tho contention In any event. Tho State
can not Justly be accused of acting in bad
faith by repudiating statute enacted in
violation OF the supreme law Of the land
tho constitution. Public officials. like In
dyidunlB, can act only in subordination TO
its terms and provisions. Moreover IN
this instance casual investigation into this
case will disclose that the defendant Ia not
afforded the preteSt for urging 2ool
faith" in defense TO the States suit The
defendant does not come with clean hands
In It's plea for equity. The statute OF 1891,
allowing the consolidation of the Texas
lines, contemplates and provides for
complete seyerence OF the Texas corpora
tion from the foreign corporation. How
has the defendant kept faith with the
State In this respect? Let the undisputed
record OF this OFFICE covering the period
since the Reorganization OF this commission
answer Traffic is diverted frcm our Texas
railroads in order TO afford tonnage and
revenue for the dominating line outside OF
tho State For like purpose combinations
have been entered into to keep water com
petition from our seaports; the earnings
OF the Texas lines have been depleted and
diverted in order that the foreign line
might profit and high freight rates In
Texas be maintained. Tho keeping OF gen.
eral offices in this State up to recent
period was in the language OF an expert
OF tho commission, "pretense and
sham"
The petition OF the State sets forth
many instances OF wrong doing not nee
essary TO repeat here. II Is suincient
TO say that In my opinion 40 Temporary
expedient can answer the just demands OF
the State. The commission has succeeded
In uncovering some OF the lijsleeds but
the cause OF the evil remains undis'urbed. ,
and so long az this condition IS permitted
to exist. Just SO long as tails con 'ticn 10
permitted to exist, Just 80 loag will tbtse
leaks continue In one form or another
can not understand why this defendant,
like every other person, should not DO re-
quired to respect and obey the constitution
and laws OF the State.
For these reasons ] beg TO repeat my
that this suit 90 nfosecut-
ed To a Anal conclusion Very respect
fully, Allison Mcyneld.
Commissioners.
~
Hon T. =. Smith. Attorney General.
Executive Office, July 6.--Dear Sir: Re-
plying to yours OF the 18th iltimo, have
to express the opinion tina. he suit pend
ing In the district court FOR dallas county (
and involving the forfeiture of the charter
of the Missouri, Kansas AMI Texas Rail-
way company OF Texas fhould be dis
missed at the cost oi the defendant and
without prejudice TO the State when the
Missouri, Kansas and Texas Hallway COM
pany shall have refunded to the Missouri.
Kansas aud Texas galway company OF
Texas the freight money, amounting 70
s148, 231. 81 as stated In -FOUR letter TO me OF
the 4th instant. and any other charges that
may be found to be due the Texas COM
pany; and, further when the Missouri,
Kansas and Texas Railway company OF
Texas shall have fully satisfied YOU as TO
its entire compliance With the laws re-
garding railway regulation In this State,
aud shall also have In every reppcct COM
piled with the conditions srd requirements