The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1906-09-08

agency at 629 Kansas
avenue. and o. B. Riley,
who holds a note against
the plaintiff for $2e and who has at
different times tried to collect it by
bringing garnishee proceedings, for
$1s526 damages.
The plaintiff does not deny the ex-
ecution of the note but contends that
he has credits to offset more than half
of the face OF the note and is willing
to pay the remainder in cash at any
time that he Is assured that he will be
absolved from further liability.
Prior TO the floods Of 1903, Mr.. Reser
and family lived on a farm near To-
peka and it was, then that the note was
executed. When the waters came
down the Kaw valley he like many
others lost all that he had.
He then applied to the Santa Fe
railroad for employment in their shops.
The position secured made It necessary
for him to work by the piece and he
was virtually compelled to learn a
trade as he worked, and fas able to
earn but about a dollar q day until he
had mastered his work Since then he
/ mas become more pronclent IN his work
and he is able to earn about $50 per
month, which are the wages he is r.
ceivings at this time.
Mr.. Reser claims that he has been
harassed by the defendants In the suit
j which he has Just fled and that while
| he has been within the jurisdiction of
the Kansas courts for the past two
years. that the punishment proceed
/ ings have been brought in an out of
the way Justices court in Missouri, so
that he can not appear or be repre-
scented.
According to the story told in the
petition of the plaintiff, the note was
/ placed in the hands of R. J. Adams,
! the collecting agent. and he in turn
claims to have placed it in the hands Of
NJ J. Kilroy, a collector in the New
York building in Kansas City, Mo.
Il Is No If
Reser objects to as suit for the collec-
4 ton of the note has been brought in
Missouri and it is impossible for him to
appear and fight the case without great
cost to h inself.
The petition says: 'tKilroy without
any actual assignment or allegation of
ownership in the plaintiff brought a suit
upon the note in the name of J. B,
Miller as plaintiff IN the Justice court
Of one ]. w. White whose temple of
Justice is several miles from Kansas
City, in the woods Of Jackson county,
Mo"
Mr. Reaer further contends that the
plaintiff in the case brought against
him is a fictitious parsonage or has no
real ownership in the note, and that
he Is working in conjunction with the
said Adams to avoid the exemption laws
of the state of Kansas. There are about
80 Of just such cases pending IN the
court of Justice J. w White against
Topeka la bOring men and they are COM
PEELED to submit to the rulings of this
justice and have no way Of defending
their rights nor protecting themselves
from the acts Of the collection agencies
who attempt this mode of collection.
On the 18th day Of August the plain
tiff in the suit fled this morning sent
his attorney, E. D. McKeeyer, to Kan
sas City to appear in the court of JUS
tice White and contend for his interests
and 1t was then found that the plaintiff
was unknown to the officers of the court
and the case was postponed.
Mr. Roser complains that his wages
have been tied up and that he has been
unable to get them released on account
OF the actions of the defendants in the
present suit and feels that he is enti-
tied to damages to the amount of ST.
59e.
For some time past employees of the
Santa Ese as well as other railroads and
corporations have been harassed by
Just such suits as the one fled against
Mr.. Reser. It matters not whether the
claim is Just or not as they are com
PEELED to submit to it. The account is
presumably sold to fictitious parties in
Missouri who are working IN conjunc-
ton with Topeka collecting agencies.
Suit is brought in Missouri and the d.
PENDANT is robbed Of the exemptions
allowed by Kansas laws.
In case the man who is garnisheed
shows a desire to fight the case and ap-
pears on the day set for trial with his
witnesses It often happens that some
thing occurs which causes the case to
re postponed and the defendant is out
his time as we'll as the money neces-
sary to take his witnesses to and from
Kansas City and reimburse them for
their time lost.
This mode of collecting does not meet
teh approval OF the railroads nor the
men who are sued. They have in all
instances been within the jurisdiction
of the Kansas courts where the cases
should have been tried IL an honest at
tempt at collecting was all that was
desired.