The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1903-05-21
DENIES THE ALLEGATIONS.
President Of Home Building Company
Declares Company Solvent.

Through its attorney. S. B. Amidon. the
State VS.. the National Homo Building
company, flied motion in the district
court yesterday to discharge the receiver
appointed for the company and the tenn
porary injunction granted by the court.
Mr.. Liggett. president of the company.
returned from Topeka yesterday. and this
is the first intimation sthat the company
would fight the case. Eight exceptions
have been taken to the appointment of a
receiver and ten to the issuing of an in
junction by the court. The hearing of the
motion has been set by Judge Dale for
Monday morning Following are the ex-
ceptions taken by the defendant for the
appointment of receiver:
First-That no notice was ever served
upon the defendant, of the application for
receiver.
Second-That the plaintiffs have no au-
thOrity in law or equity to bring the ac7
ton under the allegation contained in
the plaintiffs petition that the defendant
is a foreign corporation.
Third-That the plaintiffs had no au-
thority in their capacity. as alleged in
their petition. to prosecute the action.
Fourth-That the court has no juris-
diction to hear and determine the ac
ton.
Fifth-That under the allegations cor
tanned in the PLAINTIFF petition, this is
not proper action for the appointment Of
a receiver.
Sixth-That neither the plaintiffs nor
the court has any authority in law or
equity To prosecute the action, or 10 de
termine the same. That the allegations
contained in the plaintiffs petition are
untrue.
Seventh-That no sufficient verication
was attached to the plaintiffs petition
as required by law, for the appoint
ment Of d receiver. and no evidence was
introduced al the time of the appointment
of the receiver.
First-That no notice was ever served
upon the defendant of the application for
said temporary injunction. or of the hear
ing Of the same
Second-That plaintiffs have no right
in law or in equity to bring the acton
ana under the allegations contained in
plaintiffs petition. the plaintiffs are not
entitled to temporary injunction what
Soever.
Third-That the plaintiffs had no au-
thority in their capacity as alleged in
the petition To prosecute the action.
Fourth That this court mas no jurisdic-
ton to hear and determine the cause.
FIfth-That the injunction was improv-
identity issued.
vided by law before the granting OF the
temporary injunction That the allega-
tons made in the Detition are untrue.
SeVenth-That this is not a proper ac-
ton in which an injunction should be
granted
Eighth-That this court had no jurisdic-
ton TO grant the temporary injunction.
Ninth-That the petition was not prop
erly verified, ana was not verified 10y any
y
no legal verficauon was attached thereto.
Tenth-That plaintiffs have an ade-
Quate and complete remedy at law.
The receiver appointed by Judge Dale
took charge Of the affairs Of the com
pany Monday. but stated yesterday that
the business was in such a condition that
he could not make any statement regard
ing II ]. Z. LigCett, the president OF
the company. was seen by n reporter Tor
the Eagle yesterday and made the fol-
lowing statement regarding the condition
of the company business
A final outcome u the bitter fight that
has been waCed against the y. II. * b
Co. by the building loan Institutions and
banks of this city which night was COM
menced when the institution was or
ganized This fight was wageG solely be-
cause Of the amount Of business the
company was doing and on account OF
the cheap rate Of interest the company
charged its contract holders. They have
succeeded IN their efforts in an undcTmiu-
ing way. and made sworn statements
which are not true one II the state
ments sworn 20 was that the company
was ins0lvcnt and afterwards stating
before witnesses that they knew nothing
Of the condition OF the company. but
that they were compelled 10 MAKE this
statement in order to set an injunc-
ton.
1t seems that this CLIQUE was bound
and determined TO break Up the y. II. 3.
company. and in order 10 do SO. have re-
sorted 10 unfair means, which can be
shown.
When we came into the state % Kan
sas as a foreign corporation. The law
provided what We should do. which We
have fully complied with. We Hied our
application. as the law provides and have
paid our money. which was held AT To-
peka. and Is being held there now AS
our charter iid not call for any capital
stock. was advised by the attorney
general that II we would form capital
stock company We would not have any
trouble IN obtaining charter; and. n
members meeting and passed u resolution
for the issuing e capital stock. and put
ting our business upcn a safe basis which
seems 10 arouse the enemy. As they COM
menced 10 tight Us NJ Topeka. ard had
the charter board so pre5udIced thar they
notified them down there. 50 the coEn-y
attorney says. 10 commence suit before
they had ever acted upon our application
or even given US a hearing. They made