Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1908-09-25
SUIT AGAINST HASKELL.
c. s. Loder Having Hard Time to Col
jeet Judgment for A1,e90.

New York. Sept. 24.-Among the suits
instituted against Charles NJ HasKel
since his elevation to the governorship
NJ Oklahoma Is one by Cornelius S. LcdeF
If this city to recover al, SS0.76. costs ana
,r+arcst IN Judgment obtained against
Haskell in New York City OIL Feb. q. Eoo
The suit is pending at present IN tne
United States circuit court. sitting IN
Guthrie. .Okia.
The Judgment was obtained for money
which Haskell owed the Illinois Steel Co
in connection with his promotion OF the
Detroit & Lima Northern Railroad IN the
late 9os. He was not only the promoter
and presi1ent of this road, which later
went into the hands of a receiver at
great loss to the bondholders. but also
the contractor for the construction Of the
greater part, If not all. of the road. For
supplies obtained from the Illinois Steer
Co. he admits that he gave the concern
a personai note for $4,000 and interest
at per cent.
This debt was assigned by the steel COM
pany to Mr.. Loder, and Haskell was rep
resented by his attorneys in court wnen
the judgment was obtained against NM
Haskell, however, owned claims against
the Illinois Steel Co. One of these. for
ST.. 900 for alleged breach Of contract. ne
assigned to a business associate named
John T. Adams. The day after Mr.. Loder
obtained his judgment against Haskell
Adams brought suit in Ohio to recover
SCI, 900 from the Steel Co. and attached
Haskell's debt, alleging that 1t was the
property not Of Loder, but of the Steel
Co.
On Feb. H. 1903 John P. Bailey. another
friend Of Haskell's. brought suit against
the Illinois Steel Co. for $4,000 on an al
legged contract for legal services the
claim having been owned by Haskell He
also attached Haskells debt, alleging
that it was the property of the Steel Co
and not Of Loder. Haskell, in the sui
| now pending against him. alleges tina
| Loder cannot bring action against hin
| because the debt in question Is the prop
| erty of the Illinois Steel Co.. and ha
been attached, in effect. by himself
The defendant governor also maintains
that the statute of limitations In Okla
.homa, one of his own creations. by tn
way. since he was responsible with Brya,
for the provisions of the new states con
stitution, throws out the judgn,en
against him. The law Of the state is tina
a foreign judgment, unless sued on with
in a year of the date on which it wa
obtained. is null and void. The judgmen
was obtained in New York In 1900. an
the suit was first instituted in Oklahoma
in 1908.
| But there are complications. unfortu
nately, for Governor Haskell. In the frs
place. for judgments obtained before OK
lahoma became state the old statute
Of limitations in force In the territorie
| of Oklahoma and Indian Territory sti
hold good In the territory Of Oklahom
no foreign judgment could be sued O.
after a year from the date on which
was obtained. but in that part Of India
Territory now incorporated in the stat
of Oklahoma the time limit was 10 years
Governor Haskell asserts that he ha
been a resident of the state Of Oklaho
ma for six years. AS the state was Dor
in 1907. the question arises. Was he
resident of Oklahoma or of Indian Ter
ritory before statehood was granted? Thi
he does not say. and the assumption q
his prosecutors Is that the 10-year limi
applies to his case. but that he has NOV
ed into a county where the one-year lim
obtains in an attempt to benefit by it
provisions.
Mr.. Loders attorneys have filed demur
rers to all the points in Governor Has
kelrs defence. They point out that h
does not fear judgments which, might b
rendered against him In favor Of Adam
and Bailey. his assignees. but rattle
courts the rendition Of such Judgment
He WILL no doubt. they say. make an al
tempt to save himself from double liabi
itv by pleading in the suits brought b
his associates against the Illinois Ste'
Co that he is not indebted to the Stet