The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1904-11-15
Proceeding Before Judges
Pritchard and PurneII.
ISSUE TOM MORROW
Judge Pritchard Refuses to Continue
Case and Requires Receiver Ed
wards to Answer Today When
Question of His Removal
Will be Argued.

The case of r. l.. Forrest ct ais,
v The Southern Saw Mill and Lum-
Der Company. was called in the Fed
Iany intimate business associations
eral Court at noon yesterday before
Circuit Judge Jeter Pritchard and Dis
trict Judge Thos. r.. Purnell.
The contents of the bill of the COM
plainant. which asks the removal Of
W. j. Edwards. esq. as receiver Of
the property on allegations of fraud
and gross Acknowledgement and which
indirectly criticized and attacked
Judge Purnell upon his permitting the
too lavish issue of Receivers certih-
Gates and his qualifications to hear the
case, have been fully reported here
tofore as have also the executions
taken by complainants to an order Of
Judge Purnell suspending previous
order of Judge Pritchard appointing
t.. F. MacRae, Esq. a special master
to take testimony.
AS the results of yesterdays hear
ing the entire plant is TO be sold on
January II, 1905. by a commissioner
TO be hereafter named by Judge
Pritchard under foreclosure proceed
ings. the Union Trust Company made
Il party plaintiff and the two cases of
Carolina Northern Railroad V. the
Southern Saw Mill and Lumber Com
pany and r. l.. Forrest ct ais, V. South
ern Saw Mill and Lumber Company
and w. j. Edwards. Receiver ct ais,
were consolidated.
BY order of Judge Pritchard, the
motion of the attorneys for Edwards,
Receiver for a continuance, was over
ruled and the case will come up on
the question of the removal of the
Receiver at ten o'clock tomorrow
morning. when they are required TO
file answer in the cause.
During the course of yesterday
hearing complainants asked for and
obtained leave to file HETEROGENEOUS to
Receiver Edwards as an amendment
TO their bill. The interrogatories have
not as yet been filed and cannot be
obtained for publication. 1t is under
stood. however, that they are designed
TO take the place of the examination
which was to have been held at Lum-
berton before special examiner Mac
Rae before his appointment for such
purpose by Judge Pritchard was sus-
pended by Judge Purnell. 1t is eX-
peoted that they will follow in detail
the charges as to the Receivers acts
and conduct of the property when
are alleged in the bill.
Two Hearings Yesterday.
When Judges Pritchard and Pur-
nell took their seats, there were
number of lawyers and others present
in the court room. These were Iredell
Meares and r. T.. Lee, solicitors for the
complainants, Messrs. Pou, Mclean
and Lawrence, representing the de-
PENDANT receiver, w. j. Edwards, the
Receiver of both the Southern Saw
Mill and Lumber Company and the
Carolina Northern Railroad. I. c. Nc
Nally, superintendent of the Carolina
Northern. Cameron f. MacRae, Brook
G.. Empie. Esq. Representing the
Union Trust Company, w. j. Mont
gomery, Esq, of Marion, S. c., and
Il. II. Busbee. Esq, of Raleigh. rep
resenting holders of Receivers certif-
Gates, K. 7. Gray, ESQ.,. of Raleigh. and
others.
Upon the opening of court counsel
for the Receiver served on complain
ant formal objection to c. F. Mac
Rae. Esq, as special examiner on the
ground that while he was not part
ner of Mr.. Meares his social relations
are such that he could act impartially
as special examiner.
Considerable discussion arose among
laWerS as to whether the question at
issue in the hearing was the comDet-
ency of Mr.. MacRae and the proper
service of Receiver Edwards with the
summons i'm the case. Mr.. Meares con-
tending that the only question at issue
was the removal of the Receiver.
Mr.. Pou for the Receiver stated
that Mr.. Edwards was not ready and
that Il receiver could only be attacked |
by a motion i'm the cause and that
when property is in the hands of the |
court foreclosure proceedings cannot |
be prayed for in an independent ac-
ton.
Judge Pritchard remarked that
Judge Purnell had consolidated the |
actions.
But. said Mr.. Pou, they have filed
exceptions to Judge Purnell's order.
1.-THE question is said Judge Pritch-
ard whether or not this man has
failed in the performance of his du-
ties-whether the Receiver should be
removed"
After further argument for and
against a continuance Judge Pritch- |
ard finally held that the Receiver
would be required to file an answer
on Monday morning, when the matter
of his removal would be taken up.
During the course of the argument
Mr.. Meares took occasion to deny that
anw intimate business associations
whatever existed between himself and !
Mr.. MacRae by which the latter ought !
to be disqualified as examiner. The
appointment had been made without
Mr.. MacRae's knowledge at his sug
gestion, after he had first suggested
Mr.. K. G. Lawrence to Judge Pritch-
ard. Mr. MacRae did not then nor now
desire the appointment if it was OBJ
jected to.
Mr.. Brooks Empie, representing
Union Trust Company. filed cross
bill asking a foreclosure and TO be
made a party plaintiff and Mr. F. II. |
Busbee and w. j. Montgomery, as
holders of receivers certificates asked
to be recognized interveners.
The court finally adjourned until )
o'clock and. later until 4. on motion |
of Mr.. Meares to set aside the con-
solidation made bv judge Purnell. Al
the afternoon hearing the complains
a nj did no hal