The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-01-16
'M., J. AND K. C.
 TAKES APPEAL Carries Case to Supreme
 Court. LACK OF LEGAL AUTHORITY Railroad Claims Showing of Com plai6ants is Insufficent. Contests Judgment of ChanceiIor in Lower Tribunal in Reeeivership Procecdings--Assigns Many Causes of Error.

The action for the apointment of receiver for the Mobile, Jackson and | Kansas City Railroad, under which F. E. Dewey, former Vice-President and General Manager of the road. and Mississippi lumberman. were named as receivers a few days ago by Chan cellor Smith of Mobile. is pending in the Supreme Court. The papers in the apeal of the present management of the road from the appointment of 8 receiver have been filed with General R.fF. Ligon, Clerk of the Court. It will be remembered the majority owners of the railroad filed a super | sedeas bond in the Chancery Court, by which they resumed control of the af- fairs of the road. pending the appeal | to the Supreme Court, which has just | been perfected by the filing of the rec | ord in the case with the higher court l in Montgomery.
 l The proceedings in the higher court are brought by the railroad company against Ambrose Mcneil, Thomas Nor rison and John Mcleod. l Full copies of all the papers filed in | the case, including the complaint, the accompanying affidavits. the writ of in- l Junction, the order appointing the re- | ceivers, the bond for costs, the bond | of the receivers, and all the other pa pers filed in the Chancery Court at Mo- | bile, are included in the record, as well
 as about ten pages of assignments CT | errors by the lowen court, upon which | the appeal is taken by the various ap- pellants.
 The ground taken by the defendants | in the appeal from the lower court is, I in brief, that the Chancellor had no legal authority under the showing made to him by the complaints, Tor | the appointment of receivers for the road without a hearing, tbat the com- pIainants made no showing whatever of an interest in the affairs of the rail road company that would, entitle them to a receiver that the remedy of the | complainants for any wrongs tnas may have existed lay in the writ of | injunction that was issued by the Chancellor, which prohibited the in- | curing of any further bonded indeot- edness by the company.
 Road Assigns Error.
 Separate assignments of error were | filed on behalf of the railroad for W. D. ! Stratton, Bird M. Robinson. Alexander McDonald, R. W. Jones. IT, Charles E Levy. D. E. Jackson, Julian w. Whiting, | William H. Mcintosh. Charles D. Will loughby. Thomas F. Whittelsey and | Edmund K. Stallo. who were made Nco- | defendants in the action. and Tor, tne Alabama Securities Company, the cor- 1 poration formed among some of the individual defendants to float the bonds of the railroad. All three documents were signed by the same attorneys, and are practically identical, both In sub stances and language.
 It is first declared. in the assign ment of error, that the chancellor erred | in appointing receivers for the ral- road ex parte and without hearing | and 1t is then set forth that the chan cellor erred in appointing the receivers | because the bill is not sufficient Tn equity to justify any such appointment This portion of the legal claims Of the railroad is subdivided into several req | sons why the bill is insufficient. which are in part as follows: That com plainants in their capacity as stock | holders and bondholders of Gulf and Chicago Railway Company Ca subsi- diary company, controlled by the par ent organization, which was formed to | construct the upper portion of the road l in Mississippi), are not entitled under | the allegations of the bill to have re- ceivers appointed for the Mobile, Jack | son and Kansas City Railroad Con- pany.
 Not EntitIed to Receivers. 'SThat complainants in their capacity | as stockholders of one consolidated mortgage bond of the Mobile. Jackson and Kansas City Railroad Company are not entitled under the allegations of
 the bill to have receivers appointeo of the property of said company. That complainants in their capacity as the holders of an alleged admitted floating debt and unpaid claim for sup plies of the Mobile, Jackson and Kan sas City Railroad Company, not reduced to judgment, are not entitled under the allegations of the bill to have receiv-
 CTS appointed of the property of said company" The same allegation is made that they are not entitled to the appoint ment of receivers as the holders of thirteen shares of Lhe capital stock of the Mobile, Jackson and Kansas City Railroad Company.
 That if complainants are entitled to any relief" the bill of assignments goes on, lon the bill as filed, such relief is
 by the writ of injunction, which is
 ample for the protection of any rights they claim, or the prevention of any
 alleged wrongs set up in the bill. ..
 That a court of equity at the in-
 stance of minority stockholders or min
 ority bondholders, no default having
 occurred, cannot interfere with the cor porate management and supersede the
 same by its own control through a receiver.
 That 1t appears on the face of said
 bill that its main and real object is to
 appoint receivers to raise money by
 receivers certificates to improve and
 operate the railroad of the Mobile,
 Jackson and Kansas City Railroad
 Company so as to mako 1t realize in-
 come for the benefit of its creditors
 and stockholders, and that no court of
 chancery will appoint receivers in such