, 1865-03-10

Company md Of the city OF Ghacago, couuac1
aid Chicago CITY Railway and she city of chie2So
through tho Common Council thereof whefe3}
was among other things agreed In cons.deranoaa
he Chicago West Drsta:on Railway Company 1a.
caaiug a1l right to construct or use certain streets
oi eaid city for railway purposes, Whefc saen
Sus son or aaa sea sSoa have hs bt
gtruct or use horse railways upon cer1aiu s1sets
In said ordinance and contract named. 9uaoni
city, and which said ordinance and contract thi3
deponent Is advised and verify believe IS vaila
and binding, snd the exclusion thereby provided
rehts II he said chieaeo t Giy Halfway Company.
And this deponent further says that Thomas Aal.
less, Horace A; uurlbut anh CERTAIN asso;ia.Ss
i1lc by the name Of the Wabash Railway. Comp1-
ny, and assert and claim tho right as this depo.
nent Is informed, and believes to be tEue, Of TOT
to hare the right to construct and use horse sa1l
waSs a. srch pretended corporation, TO con5sfncs
use I'll m Ss s
fore Chns. q. Walker, the Superintendent Of tbs
C. iss & 5oanRy oP g
exhibit In said Court an Information In tho latuie
OF a quo tgarranfo agiinst sa@ Hairless aud Harl-
Sat as 70 sIan3ea ad Soe1 aaa sass saes
information aled, which WAS fled, aud will be
prosecuted in good faith md With Ill convenient
and this deponent further upon information
and belief says that the promoters Of the ssld
Wabash Railway COMPANY for the wrongful and
sSali ne il maSy psrenars co;raeE bst on th
vital points involved, studtoasly ami nstqteiy &C.
cluds such facts actually existing - might jeop-
ssd;e e q Saya ;a 81, s
Superior Court. and there call upon said court to
give Judgment upon sid record IN tavor Of the
validity Of said pretended company, hare resort:d
tn 7n Tn11 ina
That said promoters have, as depolent Is In
formed and verify believes add charges the FAC: to
cult Court BY information upon the relation Of one
Nm: H. itch, who IS represented II satd pro-
cccdings BY F. B. Peabody, Esq, his attorney;
he o 3
the success thereof, though nomina1ly prosecuting
Second. Tho promoters of said pretended Wa
ponent is also informed aud Believes, canaed suit,
corder's Court Of snil city against the above
named George X. H. Hughes, upon Small prom
''zS raThat III the promoters of the said pretend
cd company have for the like purpose, a. dcpo-
nent is iotormed and believes to DO tue, COM
mepecd a suit IN the name OF the Wabash Railway
agalnst one Mnnrtee Sell; upon small prom,s-
sorry note. and this deponent further. upon In
formation md bs!et says; taat each Of ths said
EsQ., who Is ono Of the prominent friends and
promoters Of satd pretended company, and each
q salq /, sptts pnFp995ts to be defended By e
su ne 81 nag an tsf
oq . o1} h'e5 rea ~ eain Eespeeuse eaaes Is 'nas
oi ny Ta 5n t,sa eorRto1Totthoa. 1thn :.
cf sstrs ana aata ma snf 4e
Wefe ana lnst11ea ma are nenG eassea On oy con
nEeiene.l cnInnranon and the rpesnecfya Setsn.
ants therein and their sa!d attorneys; that said
an 20 o. S ~
int 1 hs Ct n9S The
raoo 81 sen aa by
aSes VIZ " desired te R{1s9E;s saeS f. %dsssiSa, sad
rn. ~ ~ intareeta ~ aaid i:hic.ro Gtv R3ti,g
romnsnT M % ana al eity # e And taEthc1 @ dcnane1t
sa'Sf fs;oncd, H.; s.,r-rr !, N,crr,,ov
Nix Hnsns 4urpestca ihat he ~; nnnssrod hoth os
Gy AaWsy Company ~, areat h Topg To- Was a9Snt
70 ~ ID tais ease. a ana ae ~ 5aat
tt, and dlsMiss the pretended suit. Mr. aoyne
READ some antnoslues Wh1ea IN rs 1uasmcot n1d
oeaI1ng upon sae Gase. ne eaa tae oaense W.
subject to 0ae and IMPRISONMENT ne ALLEGATIONS
alleged was contrary to the practice Of tho court,
ano was an fmpndenL attenpI q trl1e Win inc IL
terest OF the conrt aud the public It was an out
rageous case Of contempt Of court
Mr. Gookns, for the Wabaah Railway Company,
strongly coutroycrtea tho points raised by Mr.
Ho}nc. II he had come Into court simply as
amseus surfs, there might have been soma 5ea.
son for the motive; bnt the counsel had knocked
away the foundation for the application, By ac~
knoN!edg3ng that ne appeared for the City Rail
way Company, which was not one Of the parties
litiRant.
Judge Goodrich, for the Wabash Company, said
there was nothing to snow that there are no real
Issues In controversy. II there be bong fds note
held By the plaintiff against the defendant. then
the charge that this Is fictitious and collHsiye
had the night 10 prosecute suit for the collection
Of the note in acy coart in tho laid, aud the cou
Fel had no right to interfere. He insisted that
t In order TO secure the Intervention Of
tho court it was necessary that
the counsel ahoufd show that no legal clatIn
exists. Whether tho sc1on was an am{cable OF
hel1gerent one did not concern either the court
the counsel. Itwas often the practice In courta
and it was recognized right for parties llt1gaut
opinion OF the court a. to the 1ernl bearings or
such facts. lie objected to the a1l1dav1t in that
it drew legal conclusions without Stating the facts
upon which auch conclusions were based. Tho
Who1sof tile controversy rested upon the denial
Of cause Of action In the shape Of bona fde In
dehtedness. BE Insisted that the affidavit WAS not
respectful to other cours in that it claimed that
fctttious snite were being brought there also.
Mf. AcA1sistcr In reply to the allegation ,of
Judge Gooktns, said that a1 PERSONS In the CON.
munsty were interested In sustaining tho authori-
~ and dignity OF tho court, and any citizen had
sceev ht hsd !. eeus Sc