Semi-weekly herald., 1908-03-05
Queer Procedure


ney Pulliam that certain parties hs,
called his attention to articles ap
pearing in The Herald in connectio.
with the Colorado State bank matte
which were claimed t, be in contemp
of court. and the court instructed the
district attorney to investigate arc
report. The matter was not brought
TO the attention of The Herald unit
late Saturday afternoon. too late fol
even mention of the investigation.
In accordance with the Instructions
OF fae court. Mr.. Pulliam requested an
interview with George n. Raymond
Saturday afternoon. 1t seems the
contempt If contempt is found to lie
is based on several paragraphs APP
peariag in last Thursdays Herald in
which the course OF Receiver Boyle is
given publicity. and that the articles
tend TO hamper the work of the re
ceiver as an officer or the court, by
preiudicing the case before the people
One allegation is that The Herald
intimated that the liability law was
repealed and no action would lie
against the stockholders.
Second-That at best the receiver
could not collect more than so 900 TO
5000 from the stockholders.
Third-That reference to the fact
that for the purpose of revenge and
To crafty few depositors and the ed
itor OF the Democrat, we have these
expensive suits in place OF propo-
sition whereby depositors will receive
dollar for dollar" was slap at the
court.
Fonrth-Objection Is made to the
paragraph that II viii not be pos
sible 10 secure twelve men who will
convict any of the bank officials with
the showing that is made"
There are a few other minor objec
tions. the whole being based on the
grounu that the receiver is an officer
of the court. subject 10 the orders OF
the court-in fact the receiver is yir-
tually the court hence criticisms and
statements as to what the receiver is
doing Is directly aimed at the court.
Now The Herald desires to say
that it has never reflected. at least to
its knowledge or Intentionally, on the
integrity OF the court in any way,
neither has The Herald reflected on
the honesty of the receiver, the courts
officer hut on the contrary has, up
to this time, stated that Mr.. Boyle
would make just as efficient receiv-
er as any one, but we have objected to
the policy of the receiver in the face
of the work of the advisory commit
tee appointed and kept in position by
unanimous voice at three different
meetings of depositors. and also called
attention TO expensive litigation that
must follow Now. If the matter com.
planned of is contempt of court, The
Herald will desist, which would mean
that the actions of the receiver, or any
receiver, no matter how many suits.
or how many attorneys, or what the
expense, could not be called attention
TO because it would reflect on the
court
As to the statement that the law
regarding liability of stockholders was
repealed this contention is set up by
many attorneys and The Herald just
voiced their sentiment and proposi-
tion that is bound to be fought
through the supreme court, which
means years before recovery is had
through this source, Should not in
terested parties be informed of this
alleged defect in the law?
AS to the statement that at best
not more than $4,000 to $25,000 can
be collected from stockholders on the
s150.000 suit, we have the word OF o.
F. Boyle that he did not consider that
over $4,000 could be realized. AT
public meeting of depositors MI
Boyle went over the list of stockhold-
ers and gave his views as to the
amount that could be collected and
placed the top notch at $4,000. Even
this sum was considered dubious ana
the amount that could be counted on
positively from this source was be
tween $1,000 and 5000. And this
view was accepted as sound. 1t was
for this reason that The Herald said
at best not over s25,O00 could be col
lected. Certainly we had no idea to
discredit the court in quoting Mr.
Boyle.
Regarding the statement that II
would not be able to secure twelve
men to convict Mr. Freeman. or other
bank officials, on the showing made,
1t Ia held this prejudices the case and
is an attempt to influence people re
garding the innocence or guilt OF men
under Indictment and about TO be
placed on trial The writer is not a
lawyer, or the son of one. and cannot
say what the ruling of courts are un-
der such statements. II a paper has
no right to make such predictions
then all the court has to do Is to notify
The Herald and it will abide by Its
rulings But while on this subject
The Herald would like to ask the par