Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1909-05-07
Officials Cannot Proceed with State
Court Pending Appeal.
TILT BETWEEN ATTORNEYS
Hagerman Charges Governor Hadley
with Failure to Keep Word.
JUDGE TALKS OF THE CASE
Says Years Ago He Knew IL Would
BE source of Annoyance 70 Him
Despite what His Decision
Might De.

KANSAS CITY, May 6.-Judge Smith Nc
Pherson in the federal court here today
continued in force the temporary injunc-
ton recently granted by Judge John F.
Philips, restraining Siebert Jones, circuit
attorney of St. Louis, from prosecuting the
suit filed by him in the circuit court OF
that city seeking to restrain the railroads
Of Missouri from charging Scent passen-
ger rate. No other state officers are in
cluded in the injunction order, which Is
to remain in force until differently or
dered by this court" The order contained
the reservation, however, that supplemental
orders might be Issued against other per-
sons should subsequent events demand
such action.
Judge Mcpherson said the order did not
include Attorney General Major and the
members of the state railroad and ware
house commission because they had stated
under oath that they had not inspired
encouraged the st. Louis suit and did not
intend to have anything TO do with it in
the future.
The order applies to all attorneys serv-
ants and employees of Circuit Attorney
Jones and therefore applies to John Ken
mis- and Rush Lake, former assistants at
torney general of Missouri, without naming
them. Mr. Kennish who argued in defense
of the justice and propriety of the St.
Louis suit objected to the action OF the
complainants in citing him and Mr.. Lake
by name in their petition, and the court
sustained Mr.. Kennish's contention that an
injunction against a client was also ef-
fective against his attorneys.
Tilt Between Attorneys.
"Mr. Hagerman told me was named in
this suit because he was mad at Governor
Hadley. That is the only reason I have
ever had for being included" exclaimed
Mr.. Kennish.
well I had right to be mad at Mr..
Had1ey, did I not? 1 had a letter in my
pocket at that time, which the governor
had written promising to order the dis
missal OF the st. Louis suit and he never
did IL. The law does not allow us TO enjoin
the governor, so l wanted to get as near
him as possible" interrupted Mr.. Hager-
man.
Res 7 am surprised that you did not
name his wife in this suit" responded Mr..
/ Kennish
Judge Mcpherson based his decision upon
the belief that the purpose of the ST. Louis
! suit was to relitigate the questions settled
by him in his final decree on the Missouri
| rate cases issued March 8, 1909 THAT de-
cree is the law until It is reversed" said
he "and it must stand until 1t is reversed
by an appellant court. It must not be
trampled upon either The only way in
which the matters covered TN that decree
can be reliugated is by an appeal or by
hearing in this court. The attorney gem
eral of the state under oath hero yesterday
stated that an appeal from my decree will
/ ha 70 IN ~ h.
! United States I must enjoin the circuit
attorney of 81. Louis from prosecuting a
case in St. Louis county. which deals with
the same subject matter which was con-
sdered by my decree"
| supreme Court TO Decide.
Judge Mcpherson referred to the quo
warranto suit filed In the state supreme
court asking that the railroads be ousted
from the state and fined for agreeing and
conspiring to fix rates" and said: This
court is entirely willing to allow the su-
preme court to dispose OF that case" The
judge said his court had no right to enJoin
the state supreme court. "On the witness
stand here yesterday the attorney general
said that II he found that the railroads had
violated the law he would drive them all
out OF the state" continued the Judge. IT
think he would be willing to see 1000 or
5000 employees Of the railroads thrown out
o employment snd the people of the state
denied railroad conveniences"
Judge Mcpherson prefaced his decision
with a statement referring indirectly to
Representative Murphy's resolution in con-
gress. He said he knew a year ago that
the trial Of Missouri rate cases would he a
source Of annoyance to him and that they
would do him no personal good 'I could
see at that time" he said. that What
ever my decision might be. would get few
compliments, no thanks, but great criti-
cisms accompanied by abuse. But / have
never had the slightest thought of running
away from this litigation because it proved
unpleasant and l do not intend to run
away now I have the kindliest feeling for
the attorneys on both sides, but / do not
think II is proper for counsel to come in
here nthis proceeding and state that
my final decree was too broad"