Evening journal., 1917-05-21
SEEK TO HALT CASE
IN DELAWARE courts
Ownbey Tries 10 Restrain
Morgan Executors From
Prosecuting Suit
BRINGS OFT HISTORY
OF THE LITIGATION

One OF the most interesting and
unique cour, litigations ever started
in this Stats In which the executors
of the late j. picrpont Morgan are
plaintiffs and which resulted in q
special act being passed by the Legis-
lature last winter, has reached across
country and developed a Colorado end.
The case is that OF the executors OF
| J. Pierpont Morgan. who was head Of
the world famous banking house
OF Morgan & Co, VS.. Joseph
A. Ownbey, q typical West5rner and
for many years a personal and bust
ness friend Of the deceased banker.
IL has just been learned that sew
eral days ago a restraining order was
applied for before United States Dis
trict Judge j. r. Riner, Of Denver, OF
Denver. COL by James II. Brown and
Harry Silverstein. attorneys for own
hey. seeking 10 enjoin the executors
from further prosecuting the case
against Ownbey In the courts OF Della
ware Final hearing for the mat
tiers in controversy before the United
States District Court in Denver has
been fixed for July H.
The cast was started in the Superior
Court OF this county by Salisbury,
Morris and Rodney, representing the
executors OF the Morgan estate. about
a year ago. Ward, Gray and Neary
represented the defendant The suit
grew out OF the affairs of the Wooten
Land and Fuel Company. a Delaware
corporation, with large holdings in
Colorado and New Mexico. in which
the deceased Morgan and Ownbey
were largely interested IL was al
legged in the original suit that Own
hey owed the Morgan estate in tho
neighborhood of 100000. as manager
OF the Fuel Company, although the
latter claimed that he had made an
accounting to Mr.. Morgan for every
cent.
It is contended that under an anti
quated Delaware law tho plaintiffs
were able 10 secure Judgment in the
local court without Ownbcy being
able to make an appearance or have
his day In court This statute al
lowed a suit To be commenced by an
against a nonresident Of
Delaware, by making an affidavit OF
such non -rosidcncc and that such dc
PENDANT was indebted TO the plaintin
Gin excess OF $500 This statute gave
the plaintiffs it Is claimed. writ OF
attachment upon which they could
insist on bail, which the defendants
must give before being permitted to
appear in court or defend against the
attachment or the debt
In this case Judgment was entered
by default i'm the Superior Court as
Ownbey could not make appearance
or defense without security. IL is
understood that Ownbey had all his
money tied up in the stock OF the
company and consequently could not
use IT, as collateral 10 get security for
the 100000 demanded. and conse-
uuently could not come into court to
defend himself Ward, Gray and
Ncary took the case TO tho Supreme
Court. whore Il is now pending, on
writ OF error. on the ground that the
law was unconstitutional, I'm that II
did not give n man his day In court
The controversy and litigation re-
suited in Andrew c. Gray, of the local
law firm. representing the defendant
having introduced in the recent Legis-
lature, a bill TO remedy tho alleged
defects in the ancient law. This bill
was passed by a large vote. The
new act provides that. Notwithstanding
the issuing OF foreign attachments,
the defendant is permitted, IL he
wishes, TO enter an appearance and
defend the case on its merits without
entering security, but preserving the
plaintiffs lien on the property at
tached.
The story OF the Wooten Land and
Fuel Company in which the great
banker and Ownboy. the defendant.
were greatly interested reads like a
novel. According TO the counter
claim applying for the injunction in
Denver, the defendant who for many
years was known as a close friend
and personal adviser of the late j.
Pierpont Morgan, and Morgan. some
years ago acquired valuable agrlcul-
tural, grazing and coal lands in Col
orado and New Mexico. With the
elder Morgan and others associated.
Ownbey organized under the laws OF
Delaware, the Wooten Land and Fuel
Company. TO take over and develop
these holdings.
AT the death OF the elder Morgan,
executors OF his estate asked for
receiver for the Wooten company and
/ for an accounting from Ownbey, its
manager. II is claimed that testimony
taken before a master in chancery,
showed that Ownbey had made regu-
/ lar and full reports TO Morgan
II is also claimed that il was while
the suit over the receivership was
still pending In Colorado. the action
was startd in this state, based large
ly on alleged advances Of money by
Morgan to Ownbey, which Il was claim
ed he had not accounted for. II is
because of the case pending in the
United States Court in Colorado that
10 is now sought to prevent further
consideration OF the case in the Della
ware courts by Ownbeys representa-
tiyes.
1.-TWO DISTRICTS U.A.M.P.