Your ShelfYour Projects

As to That Suit

11%

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Jun 28, 1906

FromReview and Herald, Vol. 83, No. 26.

Read the full edition

As to That Suit

By Editor

THERE appeared in the REVIEW of May 3 a paragraph stating that the trustees of the James White Memorial Home had entered suit through their attorney, Judge Jesse Arthur, against Elder I. H. Evans, the receiver of the International Medical Missionary and Benevolent Association, to compel him to assign to them certain mortgages to which they laid claim. Our attention has now been called to a written statement which is being circulated by the president of the board of trustees of the James White Memorial Home in which he declares this paragraph to be “untrue,” and asserts that “no suit has been begun against Elder Evans or anybody else in this matter.”
We have no disposition to make it hard for any one by quoting the records in this case, but “in the interest of truth” it seems necessary to do so. We will therefore submit extracts from some correspondence over this matter, showing plainly just what has been done.
Under date of Oct. 16, 1905, Lycurgus McCoy, who signed his letter as secretary of the James White Memorial Home, wrote Elder Evans, the receiver, demanding the cancellation of these mortgages, and closed his letter with this statement: “Of course upon your refusal to act in the premises or to sanction our action, then we will be compelled to bring an action at law, for the purpose of securing the cancellation of the mortgages; and in the event of the necessity of such action, we shall ask the court to tax up all costs, including attorney’s fee, to yourself.”
In a letter to Elder Evans, receiver, dated Jan. 14, 1906, Judge Jesse Arthur said: “I have been solicited by Elder McCoy, acting for the trustees of the James White Memorial Home, to institute legal proceedings in securing the cancellation of the two mortgages, covering the Topeka, Kan., property, taken in the name of the Medical Missionary Association, but which they claim in reality is the property of the Home.” In the latter part of his letter, he said further: “If the Home is compelled to bring a suit, it will first have to file a petition for relief to sue the receiver, and then file a long bill in equity, setting up its rights,” etc.
Under date of April 5, 1906, Judge Jesse Arthur served formal notice upon Elder Evans, receiver, that he is “presenting to the court a petition asking that you be directed and ordered to assign the Bates and Chamberlain notes and the mortgages to secure them, covering the property near Topeka, Kan., to the James White Memorial Home.”
Under date of April 16, 1906, Judge Arthur served a legal notice upon Elder Evans, receiver, requiring him to produce in court certain original records relating to the affairs of the Medical Missionary Association and the James White Memorial Home, stating that “in default thereof, secondary evidence will be given of each of all said records.”
It thus appears that the secretary of the board of trustees of the James White Memorial Home threatened to bring “an action at law;” that Judge Arthur, their attorney, declared that he had been “solicited by Elder McCoy, acting for the trustees of the James White Memorial Home, to institute legal proceedings;” and that in order to bring a suit it would be necessary for him “to file a petition;” that later he presented a petition to the court, and cited Elder Evans to appear with certain records.
Now it is technically true that a suit has not actually been entered upon the docket of the court, but the filing of this petition is the first step in bringing “an action at law,” as threatened by the secretary, or in instituting “legal proceedings,” as the attorney stated that he had been solicited to do. Of course the receiver could let the case go by default by not putting in any defense or making any objection to the court’s granting all that was asked, but with the information in his possession concerning these mortgages he did not feel at liberty to do this, and hence he engaged counsel to oppose the first step in the “legal proceedings.” While we admit, in view of further information, that the statement made in the REVIEW was incorrect in form, we leave it with our readers to decide whether it was not correct in substance, and whether the president of the board of trustees of the James White Memorial Home did not take advantage of technicalities in order to bring a charge against the REVIEW.