The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-05-14
BREWERIES ARE BUSY.
They Are Giving Some Attention TO
Attorney General at Last.

The Ferd Helm Brewing company
and the Kansas City Breweries COM
pany have both entered appearance in
the supreme court and filed answers
to the proceedings commenced against
them by the attorney general.
The chief defense made by both
companies is that their business is
| purely of an interstate character and
that they sell intoxicating liquor to
Kansas people, but do not transact
any business in the state themselves.
| Both companies are said to own
property in Kansas. The answers
tdeny the right of the supreme court
| to inquire into the title of this prop
erty or to confiscate it. The answers
say on this point:
This defendant denies the jurisdic-
ton of this court in this proceeding to
inquire into the title. or right of own
ership of any property owned by TINS
defendant, of any, in the state of Kan
sas or to enter any judgment trying
| or affecting title thereto, or to the
right Of ownership of this defendant,
| if any, herein or any judgment seek
| ing to sell, conf1scate or otherwise dis
pose of such property, because this
court has not original jurisdiction of
such matter in quo warranto."
The companies. also assert that any
| judgment of the court ordering the
sale or conf1scation of their property
| in kansas would be violation of the
Fourteenth amendment of the Con-
stitution of the United States, in that
it would deprive them of their prop
erty without due process of law. 1t
is further recited that it has derived
no benefit of protection from the Kan
sas laws and that the interests of
stockholders or creditors do not need
the appointment of a receiver to con-
serve the property.
The companies also contend that the
supreme court cannot take original
jurisdiction in violations of the prohib-
itory liquor law, as this power is dele
N olxy fn "a n fCf vii rs
and that these courts are the only ones
which may seize property for violations
of the law. The assertion is made that
the Ferd Helm company is being dis
eliminated against by the court, that
many other foreign corporations own
property in Kansas and are using it
without molestation. Harkless, Crysler
& Histed and Hazen & Cav are given
as the attorneys in both cases.
In addition to the two brewery COM
panies two of the alleged agents of
brewery companies, c. w. Curtis and
Robert Kneisler, also entered appear
ance by filing demurrers to- the petition
of the attorney general. They were
made defendants in the suits against
the brewery companies. In both demur-
rers it is alleged that the petition of
the attorney general does not recite
facts sufficient to constitute a cause of
action against the two men,
Six months to Quash the service of
summons were filed. The companies
contend that the service of the sum-
mons was not properly made and that
they have not been served, as the men
whom the sheriffs found and served
were not officers or agents of any of the
companies. The companies filing these
motions and the alleged agents are:
The Helm Brewing company c. w
Curtis, Topeka; Rochester Brewery
company, Calvin Huntz, Topeka; Joseph
Schlitz Brewing company, G. w. Curtis,
Topeka; Carl Hinderman, Atchison;
Helm Real Estate company, A L. Ber-
ger Kansas City; Pabst Brewing COM
pany, c. W. Curtis, c. L. Convey, Tope-
ka; Imperial Brewing company, A l..
Berger, Kansas City, Kan.