The advocate. [volume] (Charleston, W. Va.) 1901-1913, 1907-03-07
N feklsk t't17ii'1I|
A. Legal Battle, e've4
Land Begins /.
OVER ee',,o|l|'l60'pAeR1:El''S||

lVyM OAV V' ~ q. :
Judge Aston G. Dayton of the feds
eral court listened yesterday after
noon to the arguments Of Attorney
Arthur Eugitsh, the New. York attorss
heS whosh appearing here tef about
7o:settlers In the couatiss otSRaleigb,
land Wyoming, In the case OF the,
Western Pocahoatas Corporation Vs.
Abrah ham Accord and others, in which
the former are expected to ahow
cause, Why. the degree granted by
1 1ot 'Sa D p ton aR ssptsmeer should
|. The case was called In the court
before noon yesterday and Attorney
Taylor Yfnson OF Huntington for the
plaintiffs made the opening talk In
which he declared. that it was With
out precedent that an attorney could
come betore,R court and On mere nor
uQn have. the court set aside a. de-
cree given at a former session of the
court. He also referred to the atm
davit flled by, Attorney English and
sworn to by John B. Day ofWyoming
county as scurrtlous making attacks
on the professional standing Of mem
Eksss sot the bar and also citizens; OF
Ethe state. Judge Dayton stated that
he would hear. arguments on the rule
referred to and relating to the mo-
ttioRs for the plaintiffs to show. cause
why the verdict should not be set
aside. : & < ~ g. -. :.
At tht afternoon session, Attorney
English, who is accom- aDied here "
that he had been charged by, emf
nent counsel with thing q sSdrriinus
affidavit aud with traducingf the char
iRcter: Of emient citizens He stated
Belva A: Lockwood, the noted woman
lawyer OF Washington. presented his
| side Of the case for the settlers. At
the opening colloQuy, ensued be-
tween Attorney Price Of Charleston,
who represented Judge IT, L. Hehd~j
1ritze. who was alluded to in the tffff-
davit filed. with the court, and the
New York lawyer. \ The latter stated
| that he was a lawyer, an6G regretted
exceedingly to call the attention. OF;
the court to the negligence OF scer-.
tain lawyers and would hesitate TO do
so. Mr.. Price responded that ha had
already made charges against Judge
HendpitZe in regard to his profess
sional standing and although he
might hesitate, they would not. &C. =
| Mr.. English then VENT ahead with
his presentation. He*went back to.
1 the, year 1868, when he stated that
John West had paper title to some
$4,000 acres OF land in the, counties
of Raleigh and Wyoming which West
Ihad inherited from q man, named
Vaudeville. In that year; west con-
tVeyed his interest to Dubois and
Int Of T1I1o nj yhn al 4 ~,
paper title until 1889 when the same
was conveyed to Maben and Catlett.
In 1903. he said, Maben and Catlett
conveyed $4,000 acres Of the tract to
1.-THE Western POcahontas Coat and
Lumber Company and received a
mortgage ON the same. At the time
Of the transfers there were many
families living on the land under an
agreement with John West, who had
made contracts with them for the
lsale, but who had failed to give them
la deed.
+ Attorney English stated that III
1905, the Western Pocahontas Cor
pQration was formed whose head
quarters were supposed to be in
Richmond, Virginia, but the presf-
dent and secretary e. the Virginia
corporation were the same as the
1
Virginia Coal and lumber Company.
A suit had been brought, he asserted,
in the circuit court of Raleigh county
to foreclose the mortgage OF the
I West " ifgtnta Coal and Lumber
Company He stated that the Vir.
ginia corporation was formed on
October S, 1905 and that the sale oc-
CURED at Beckley on October 18th.
In January, 1905, ejecture suits were
brought against the settlers and this
was followed by the filing Of a bill
in equity, stating that q conspiracy
had been formed among the; settlers
to cloud the title. s,..., J..
4 He stated that when the equity
suit was brought, the settlers en-
Iployed Mr.. Henritze to represent
them and. that the lawyers Was paid
several hundred dollars to represent
these poor, ignorant people, many Of
Whom could neither read nor write,
and that Henritze wrote, several let
ters In regard torthe equity suit. On
the 28th of September, he stated,
the decree was entered by Judge Day
ton and said he thought the court was
mislead. ..s. :. g.. e.,
| Attorney English based his argu~
ment on two propositions, One. was
that the formation of the Virginia
corporation was for the~puFpose- OF
getting the action into the United
States court through NONRESIDENT
| corporation and the. second PROPOSE
ton was that the bill In equity being
void on it's face. the court had no
Jurisdiction. He maintained that
the Virginia corporation did not have