Omaha daily bee., 1905-08-15
ANSWER TO COOOEN'S SUIT
Executive Castle Of the Royal HighlandsrI
Questions Courts JurisdictiOn.
HELD STATE ALONE CAN INSTITUTE SUIT
Attorney Burnett Advances Four
Grounds of objection 90 Petition
and Then Makes strong De-
nialn and Assertions.

The matter Of the suit of DR.. William F.
Gooden against the Royal Highlanders will
come to a hearing IN the federal court on
August 20. Al the time the order to show
cause was issued by Judge Munger. the
hearing on the same was set for last Thurs
day. at which time II was put over until
Tuesday, August Is The showing Of the
defendants is now ready for filing and when
this is done the plaintiff will have until
Saturday TO make counter showing
Defendants, the Royal Highlanders and
the members composing the executive
castle OF the order. at the start raise
question Of Jurisdiction. 1t Is asserted that
the court has no Jurisdiction, for the rea-
sons:
(a) The amount and value in controversy
in the suit does not exceed 5000, exclusive
OF interest and costs.
% Said complainant has an adequate
remedy at law as shown on the face Of the
bill of complaint
(c) Said bill OF complaint is brought By
complainant as a member or stockholder
Of the corporation Of the Royal Highland
ers.
state Alone Can Bring Suit.
(d) Said organization is organized and
doing business under the laws Of Nebraska.
The bill is a collateral attack upon said
CORPORATION and its right to exercise its
powers and franchises The question touch
ing the organization OF the association, it's
plan and form Of government, methods Of
doing business and the like can be raised
only by the state OF Nebraska, and then
only in direct action at law brought by
said state for said purpose.
The answer alleges that the executive
castle has always complied with the law
10 pA fhat
the order and its affairs have always
been under the control OF the auditor OF
public accounts, with whom all reports
required by law have been regularly filed
that there are now $1,000 members of the
order, Of which number 1900 are in Ne
braslNa, and that these members hold
certificates ranging from $500 to 1900
II is expressly denied that DIR. Gooden
holds the once OF chief physical exam
liner, or any other, in said order There
Is also a denial that the order has not
a representative form of government, or
that the most illustrious protector or any
other OF the chief officers have entered
into any scheme to perpetuate themselves
IN ONCE. or that they have conspired to
loot or graft or to misapply the funds OF
the order in any way.
GOOden Party to Action Taken.
Il is set up that plaintiff himself made
and supported the motion fixing the sal
aries he complains of and that he was
present and participated in most of the
business transacted by the executive castle
The answer further says no minutes have
been unlawfully altered OF destroyed but
are In fact preserved as adopted in reg,
ular form.
OF the cause for the removal OF Dr.
Gooden from the Office of chief physical
examiner and the appointment thereto OF
DR.. Isaiah w. Haughey, the answer al.
legeA that Dr. Gooden was removed be-
cause his work was careless and inefh-
cient; that he rejected meny good risks
ana accepted many bad ones, and that
there are hundreds Of letters on file going
TO prove this charge.
on the matter OF making regalias the
answer admits that some were made tc
order OF members by the wives of chief
executive officers, but it is also set uI
that the wife Of DR.. Gooden also made
some OF the regahas.
Another strong point In the answer. II
the view OF Attorney Burnett, who pre-
pared the same. is that DIR. Gooden nov
has an appeal pending TO the meeting which
he is seeking to enjoin, from the action o
the executive castle In removing hin
from ONCE, and has served formal notict
that he will press said appeal.