The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1902-10-26
Thorough investigation Of the
Panama Corporations
THEIR LIENS AND MORTGAGES.
After Careful Study Of the Ques,ion
from Legal Point OF View. Both in
This Country and in France,
Attorney General Knox Con.
cludes That We Can Se.
cure Valid Title.
(By Associated Press. }

| WASHINGTON, October 225-Attorneys
General Knox is OF the opinion that tho
United States should accept the offer OF
the new Panama Canal Company. sub
mitted last spring. for the sale of the
canal for $itouo1D it would recetre
through the4 parties in interest valid
and uilincInhered title to the property,
This decision was arrived at after4a thort
ouSh and exhaustive investigation OF the
situation in Faris. first by Special Attor~
ney Charles W. Russell. and later by
the Attorney General himself. The ATT
torneN-General formally submitted the
opinion to President Roosevelt today.
IL makes about three hundred pages.
The history and nature OF French COM
panies of the kind in question are exc
planned at length in the opinion. Thel
are said to be altogether diffeEeA from
our corporations. but TO be easily under>
stood II looked Eprn as private partAeHs
ships, which is their essential charaoteG.
rs to the proposition that the United
States would be subject to the debt -
claims of the Stockholders and b..-.,-
holders and other creditors OF both the
companies. the opinion SAYS:
As a general p-opGs.ttoN. it is not
perceived how there cos,:d re any law OF
equity for subject .iG Il purchaser of an
narship tsucf as tle OIL G5ntpany) to the
deD:s Of the partners hip IL such We're
the laws. there wott! BE na purchasers OF
slclt assets. stnt. ts,a creditors would res
cetve tl, p;lS s.ie.it / { t,i.if de.ts out OF
tbs. proceeds. nor Stockholders any divi-.
d nd OF Il residue.
MORTGAGES MD LIENS
Neverthelcss; the opinion eyhuustiveiy
considers all possible mortgages and
ether liens affecting the property itself.
real or personal. under French or Colom-
hi;in law. 1t says there have been
mortgages and pledges OF personal prop
ertv and shows in detail what became
OF them.
A. to the proposition that th. United
States cannot take Title To the shares of
stock of the Panama Rs,iiroad e'ampany,
Il New York corporation which the
Panama Company proposes Ia sslf With
the canal property. tire npini0n holds
that the government can take anil hold
any KIND! OF property it may have. need
Of in th, si.r,e manner - IN Individual
can: that it would hold it's shares as
an individual would hold them
= AS to the objection that Congress has
authorized q Purchase from the new
company only. and mt from the ll1uie
dator. ths opinion s;tvs:
tfstJAI e z titr5 y f1sN x 5s}alt' M -
Certainly in view of the condition OF
the title as hsrenbesore explained. tha
purchase will he from the rev company.
The consent of the lifnislsitor would ba
at most waiver Of rights as to tho
property transferred TO the new CONF
pany But it this were. otherwise. IL
would be unreasonable to treat the ace
of Congress as forbidding q purchase
from the new company. in which IL
would be necessary for the old. compan9
or the Iiduidator to join as vendor. This
would be to defeat. not to ascertain tho
will of Congress What it wants is q
good title from the owner of ccrtaln
specified property, the owner being sup.
posed to be. and being admittedly iiI
part the new company. and it is enc
tireIy justifiatle 70 buy from the owner.
although the principal ownership should
be found not to be in the new company
The opinion closes as follows: Foe
the reasons have gtgen#I am of opin.
ion that the United States wo,,ld receive
a good. valid and unencuElbered title