The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1905-03-16
Extensively Interested in the
Traction Company
BIG MEN IN MONTGOMERY
Emerson Mcmillan and Herbert D.
Ward Entertained BY Local Persons.
Alabama Cotton Products Co.
Petition Not Well Taken.


Emerson Mcmillan of New York, a mill
lionaire promoter and head of the McMil-
liam syndicate, owners of several large
gas. electric light and street railway
plants in the United States, among them
the principal part of the Montgomery
Light and Water Power company The
other is Herbert d. Ward, a writer on
the Atlantic Monthly. and one of the
well-known literary men of the day. He
is the husband of Elizabeth Stuart
Phelps, the writer, and together they are
doing a great deal Of work. Mr. Ward
had story in the last issue of the
monthly entitled, Tangent of a Crime"
Mr.. Mcmillan has been entertained by
the local officers of the Montgomery Light
and Water Power company, spending yes
terday at the generating plant and dam
at Tallassee. Today he was shown over
the city by General Manager Chambers
and Secretary Bowen. Chief Engineer
Abel, who married a Montgomery girl
by the way. Miss Martin, is also in the
city and went the rounds with the party.
A Patron Of Art.
Mr.. Mcmillan has a magnificent home
In New York, and with j. Pierpont Nor
gan is a great and enthusiastic collector
of art productions. He has some of the
best pictures of the day and the past in
his private collection, and gets wonderful
pleasure out of the possession of them.
This is Mr. McMlllan's first trip to the
local property. He was called last week
to Birmingham to see a sister who lis i'll
there.
Mr. Ward is here for the purpose of
writing some articles for a number OF
publications. among them it is presumed
the Atlantic Monthly on southern condi-
tions. 1t is presumed further that he is
going to touch on the peonage cases that
have been taken up in the state and will
write something of the conditions that
now exist In that movement. He is being
shown every courtesy by the officers of
the United States court and has access
to all the records and facts that he will
need to give him an idea of what he is
after.
Executive clemency
The acting governor has pardoned John
Davis of Russell county, who was con-
victed last fall for assault and battery
and given sentence Of three months
and a fine of $3.50. The trial Judge and
the man who was assaulted urged the
pardon, saying it was not believed that
there was airy intention to do harm.
Mac Clay. ]. B. Clay and A. w. Dea-
son of Jefferson county have been re-
lieved of forfeiture declared on the bond
of Mac Clay 1t was shown that Clay
was fifteen minutes late and that for this
delay a forfeiture was taken for $780,
lie was later tried in due process.
Judge Aston. state supernumerary
judge. will hold an adjourned term of
the Walker county circuit court for ten
weeks, beginning April 10.
Application No, Well Taken.
Judge Asa Stratton, referee in bank
ruptcy, has ruled that the application
tc place the Alabama Cotton Products
CO mpany in bankruptcy, thereby taking
H. out of the state courts is not well
taken. He holds that while the corpora
tion is insolvent 1t has committed no
act of bankruptcy, and therefore, is still
within the province of the state STATUTES
The matter has been appealed to Judge
Thomas G. Jones of the United States
court for review.
The history of the case Is this: The
Alabama Cotton Products company,
which is the local office of the Amer
can Cotton company. promoters and
handlers of the square bale, filed a bill
H. the city court of equity, to dissolve
the corporation, all the stockholders save
ore. agreeing. Then the Consolidated
National bank of New York, and other
creditors, filed a petition In the bank
ruptcy court. charging that the company
had committed acts of bankruptcy and
the referee ordered references to ascer-
tain the facts The First National bank
o. Chicago then came in with other
creditors. The referee held that the cor
pCration was insolvent but had commit
ted no act of bankruptcy, thereby dis
missing the petition of the latter It'll
giants and leaving 1t in the state courts.
Notice of appeal was then taken to the
court of Judge Thomas G. Jones'
Question Raised.
The ltigants who desire to have the
case tried out In the bankruptcy courts
are represented by United States Dis
trict Attorney Warren s. Reese, while
the other side is represented by Watts
&c Son, of Montgomery and Knox, Bowie
& Acker of Admission. The question that
has been raised is found In the amended
bankruptcy law of 1908, viz: whether a
corporation which applies to state
court to be permitted to dissolve its
corporate existence. when upon the face
of the papers in the state court it is
not shown that the corporation Is insol-
vent, whether the petitioning creditors
in bankruptcy proceeding can show
that as afact that Being insolvent It
applied for a receiver or trustee for its
property" 1t is commended by the attor-
iityS IOr the state court side, following
decision of Judge Clarke, in re Doug
lass Coal and Coke company. 131, f. R..
| to the effect that one cannot look beyond
the records of a state court to prove
insolvency Of a corporation.
The Other Contention.
The other side contends that this par
| ticular decision is based on adversary pro-
ceedings in the state courts and the facts
are different in the present contention,
also that this case is not adversary, from
the fact that the proceedings at first were
voluntarily made by the defendant COM
pany Itself and that this brings it under
subdivision 4. of the act, and under the
pale of the words being insolvent." The
contention is. therefore, made that the
movers for bankruptcy authority have a
perfect right to show this fact and prove
that application for received was made
by the corporation and that because of
this insolvency receiver was put in
charge of the property. This point is
based on a decision in the Milbury case.
handed down about the same time as the
Douglass case, referred to; also that the
conditions that existed In the Douglass
case are not within the rights of said
subdivision of the act. In other words.
as this is not an adversary proposition
and the application for dissolution was
made by the defendant company itself.
said subdivision Is applicable which is in
line with the latter case cited
Dispensary Law Attacked.
An attack has been made on the vail
dity Of the dispensary act by which the
commissioners of the dispensary at Abbe-