The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-08-16
SALE WAS VALID
Topeka Attorneys Discuss COun-
ty Sale of No. p. Stock.
j. q. SlOnecker Says County Of.
ficials Have Power.
NO NEED FOR A VOTE.
Judge West Considers Commits.
sioners' Rights.
Kelly & Kelley Receive Opinions
From Lawyers.

| The arguments on the other side OF
the fight over the Missouri Pacific stock
sale by the county commissioners are
now being brought forth. Kelly &
Kelly, who were authorized to make
the sale OF the stock have written to
many well known Topeka lawyers for
their opinion on the matter and these
opinion have brought out many interest
ing points.
]. G. Slon ecker is of the opinion that
the sale was and is valid and that
Kelly & Kelly have paid into the bank
Tor the county all the money "accru-
ing to it from the sale.
Mr.. Slonecker says in part:
In 1891 the legislature amended chap
ter 124 of the laws of 1875 and author
lied the board of county commission
trs to sell said stock or any part there
OF or right thereto on such terms and
conditions as they may deem for the
best interests of such county and apply
the proceeds of such sale to the pay
bonds of such county But such act
provides that no election shall be re-
CURED where suc1 stock has been held
for period of more than ten years or
where no dividend has been paid there
on within that time.
while it is true that the act pro-
.V:Ges chat the board shall apply the
proceeds of such sale to the payment or
DurC chase OF enc outstanding DOnQS OI
such county, in my opinion such pro-
vision is merely directory and not
mandatory and is in no event part
of the authority to SELL
The contract as executed by the
board shows, upon it's face, that the
board had arrived at the conclusion
that it would be for the best interests
of the county and that they would sell
the stock at twenty cents on the dollar,
unless a larger price could be secured
L understand that it is contended that
this contract delegates to you authority
conferred upon the board only and
which the board cannot legally dele
gate-that is to say, the right to de-
termine the price. 1 am not able to
agree with this contention. The con-
tract shows on it's face that the board
had exercised their discretion and had
determined to accept $40 per share
and authorized you to sell at that
price, but at the same time were
thrifty enough to provide that If you
secured more than that the county
should have half of the excess. Hav-
ing determined that it would be for
the best interests of the county to sell
at that price, in my opinion the con-
tract is valid and the sale made as
therein provided is also valid"
The contract shows, as already in
dictated, that the board had arrived at
the conclusion that it would be to the
stock of the railroad company, at not
less than $50 per share and that they
employed you to negotiate the sale at
not less than that price. The provision
is made that you are to receive as
compensation for your services in case
of a sale fifty per cent of any amount |
above $40 per share. If you sold for |
only $40 per share of course you would !
receive nothing. If you sold for more |
than $50 per share you were to receive |
one-half of the additional sum-
AS already indicated this law gives |
the board the right to sell the stock |
cor any part thereof or right thereto |
on such terms and conditions as they |
may deem for the best interests of |
such county" This gives them not only |
the right to fix the price at which they |
will sell but the terms and conditions |
as to time, place and manner of pay
ment The board exercises this au-
thority and fixes the terms upon which
the sale might be made.
The commissioners had the right to
say where the payment should be made
and they did so by determining that it |
should be paid into the Bank of Topeka |
and all that they required that you
should pay into the Bank of Topeka