Tulsa daily world. [volume] (Tulsa, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1905-1919, 1913-12-27
SUIT
AGAINST FRISCO
kECIllIl,S TO STE DIRECTORS
AND FORMER DIRECTORS
on THE ROADS.
feeder Sales" QUESTION
Court Named Special Attorney to Seek
Recovery From Men Who
Bought the Lines.


sT ToIrIS A., D,, os p..,i,.
''S u tue H' LOUIS ana san frah'lsco
railroad today were directed by cir
cut Judge Sauboru I'm the United
er,,,s di.,rI, ....,, a., hri,., .o.,t.,,
"'" S'"'S "b"n'' present ana FORMER
directors of the railroad.
The courts order Is qualified only
IL, n. ,r,,is. r.,t .,i,y .hou b,
''""N"' " tue SP''''' 'ounS'l "p-
pointed today believe that they can
Nc successfully maintained.
That the special counsel viii be
convinced tDat such suits would DO
succcsstul is generally agreed, as tho
attorneys are the men who represent
ed William W Nllcs, of New York,
Frisco stockhoIdcr I'm his petition for
permission to BRING restitution suits
The suits are TO be based on the
sale 10 the Frisco of feeder lines that
were represented by syrdlcates of
members
rhe court appoiutcd-as special
counsel for receivers John u. john
son and Lewis Johnson, who We're at
torneys for Niles. These attorneys
wcre given exclusive charge Of the
suits which thereby were taken from
the jurisdiction Of W T. Evans, gem
eral counsel for the Frisco railroad,
and Of Henry ;. Priest counsel for the
receivers
Judge Sanborn, In his decision was
careful TO make plain that ne had
formed no opinion as to the Justice Of
the allegations against officials OF the
railroad.
The transactions of which COM
pleint Is made the decision says,
ARE 50 varied and complicated and
the rights and liabilities ~ the parties
CONCERNED are conditioned by so many
facts and circumstances, that ths
court cannot form, and ought not to
form any opinion concerning these
rights or the liability of any party
until each Of the parties has had op-
portunity to relate the facts.
The facts stated in tho petitions
has convinced as that the court can
permit or conduct no Investigation so
iair TO all parties as that which will
result from the institute Of a suit or
suits against the officials against
whom complaint is made because In
that way only can every party in in
tcrcSt, whether he be creditor stock
holder or defendant, present 10 tho
court every fact material too the is
sues, cross examine the witnesses or
his opponent, have fun and fair
hearing and In the end, secure "A con-
elusive adjudication.
The general charge against tho
former officials and directors of the
Frisco company is that they purchas-
ed railroad property I'm which they
were pecunlarily interested. to the
legal injury Of the Frisco and to their
own advantage, and the court is OF
the opinion that these petitions dis
close facts sufficient to entltle the
complainants to institute a suit
against some Of these former Of
ficials"
Discussing whether the suit should
be brought By any individual stock
holder or By the receivers, Judge
Sanborn said:
"The legal injury was to the Frisco
company and the cause OF action ac-
crues to that company before the re-
cciycrs were appointed.
when they were appointed that
cause Of action was transferred TO
and vested in the receivers II is their