The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1908-01-03

Granting petition filed by ths
Seaboard Air Line VS.. the Continental
Trust Company, OF Baltimore Judge
.Jeters C. Pritchard, of North CAROLINA.
sitting In the United States Circn.t
Court for the Eastern District of ylr-
sinia. yesterday appointed r. Lancas-l
ter Williams and $. Davies Warfictd
receivers for the railway, the two at
once entering into bond of S50,o00 each.
and taking charge of all the affairs 4
of the road.
The action of the court caused no
surprisesin Richmond. as 1t was known
here that the petition was presented
at Danville on the previous night AMI
would most likely be granted. Messrs.s
William r. BSrne, of New York. REP
resenting the Ryan interests; Samuel
Unternleyer. of New York, counsel fo:,i
the Continental Trust Company, judge
Leigh R. Watts. of Portsmouth. gen.
eral counsel for the Seaboard Air Line.
and Hon. Eppa Hunton. Jr.. of Rlclt.
mond, went to Danville on Wednesday,,
met Judge Pritchard and returned with
him to Richmond yesterday. &
The matter was decided some tine
early in the morning. and Clerk Joseph
P. Brady entered the decree shortly
after 10 o'clock. 4. "a
Want Third Receiver.
2
In the afternoon, Attorney Edwin
B. Boetjer, counsel for committee OF
Baltimore bondholders independent Of
the interests represented by Messrs.
Williams and Warheld, appeared be-
fore Judge Pritchard and submitted y
motion for the appointment OF 9 thiri3 rllr'l
receiver. He urged no objection to thes
appointments already made. but asked
that C;ustavus Ober. a baltimore bank
Ter. be named in addition. Mr.. Oberss
family connections ally him with tho
Williams faction.
In continuing the motion until Jan-s
Euary 14th, Judge Pritchard remarked
that il another receiver was to- he
appointed he thought he should ps
lchosen by the court independent OF
any suggestion from the interest ma k 4
| ing the application.
General Satisfaction.
Among those interested IN the aftairs
Iof the railway, both here and else
where. the appointment OF receivera5
seems to meet with general approval.
and there is apparently strong BELIEF
that 1t will result in benefit to both
\ the stock and bondholders. and perhaps
lin the early rehabilitation or the prop
.lerty involved.
I. a large number of interested par
Ilties, composed mainly Of lawyers. bank:
llers and business men from Norfolk
,Iand Baltimore were In the city yes
'Iterday, and many OF them We're atathe
Federal building during the day loo
ling over tile papers in the case.
4 The billgin equity, hled by the srait,,,s
IWay company. Is Il voluminous fss,su-
.lnent, and 1t sets out In much detail the
u reasons why receiyershtp proceedings
sIarc looked upon as necesSa ry.
i Cause of Action. III
i In a word, it alleged that conditions
sIhad reached a point where the company
II could not meet its obliga tfons due on
4 January 1, Il 90S that 1t was threatened
with suits and attachments which
Z would stop the movement OF trains.
4 and that II required to meet these
'Iobltgations Y It would on that date has
! entirely without means. Detailed ref -as
terence is made to all the utstandinE
u mort cages and other obligationsS
\ against tho original company and con
ltrolled lines, anu in addition to these
'llt Is declared that the sum OF : 900, 100
!. was due on January st for taxes, pay
rolls. supplies, etc. Az 5s3 3s5 ,sss sss
4 The State courts in all he coun ~
! Through which the road ops tes have
I 'tIurisdictipn IN matters @ relating to-
Eclaims against the compar ms, \ III and ra-s
sccivership proceedings I'm the Federal
IA courts were adopted for the best ~ ~
-iterasts of&all concerned, i and TO prevent
\ la general tie-up OF the bus mess - tlls
! tIroad. .s9
! The Receivers. 81
!. rhe receivers arc placed In absolute
.lsemtrot Snfftl.e affairs of the eolnpanSs|
ny ley direction of the court. NJ 5copysAAs