, 1869-01-06
THE TELEGRAPH tMsRoolio.
Competing Wires ON tha Same
Poles to be Allowed
Tbs Injunction Against the Pacific d
Atlantic Company Dissolved.
Judge Jameson'z Decision.

Judge Jameson, presiding in the chAneery
branch Of the Superior Conf1 5estesoA1 aeu.
crrd biz opinion and uAde his decision IN
the matter of the ri2hte Of the Vest
am Union Telegraph Company md tho
Pacific & Atlantic Telegraph Company.
\. TO tho use Of the poles eree.ed By the Grtat
Eastern Railway Company, BY the latter naaea
telegraph company. In this ease thsse Was nlil
By the Pacific Company to restrain the teaEog
dnvu Of its wires npon these poles There wss
.,.o . r~nas bill TO restrain the paciac from
tt.ntehluc tts wires upon the poles which, under
= contract. the Wesse.n Union claimed - Its
own. The motion was to dissolve the Latter IN
Junction. ..--,
c.n Onion Telegraph Company made conuset
with the Great Eastsrn Railway (which AFTER
ward, BY change Of name, oeeame tne ea1eakS'
Columbus & Indians Central Railway company.
byvhich set Of telegraph poles wese stectehed
along the line Of the railway, for the use OF she
railway company and the telegraph company.
The agreement, made on the 2lst gay OF Novem-
ssv:ness es5 e GsS eht o. Il
:s;t5ss .,,.ss;9s e
Wire jor tic de Of the railroad, and that At places
Hhtre railroad operator was stationed. Nanfo :h
"a s@pe1e sbond IL e
racrcsl despascLes, onehalf Of the price to 50 70
The tHo eompa1tes, the ralifoaa eompsnY otnolnE
itseif 10 send no commercial dispatches over It's
ilne nom stations where the telegraph company
| should be represented.
II, Wises upon ,he poles, and sinee thIe vas done
On n1 tbe sd Of May. 1s5s, the Paciae s Atlantic
LEE r. Reease e .ss se q lie sane poles
md TIC company, By It's President: aesotdsd
Leave provided me leave did not 1nses shs Prasi
| rnrnnsny trttpor.!blt, the perm1sslon being upon
The Fro1rd that the telegraph company should
sssame % Lihe,llty Of i violation Of the con-
Tie 1Psc,nc / Atlantic Company availed It.
self Of The privilege thus accorded, and stse1sneo
il vie from point In Indiana into this State.
uiae!ue ia wirea upon cro.s-bars four feet II.
ths Western Union. 1he faet Ta: d.. discovered
Therrnnor n i1turction was sued out TO restrain
tbs destruction. The Injunction was granted
the Western Union cane n Tsh nt9 6soes - hs p
Wtrcs anon thp poles 1t claimed to be IL own.
, The latter injunction vas refused. The ease
vent 70 the Supreme CoaIs wnese = ei1o, a. iha IN
junction to be decided upon bY this Cou1t-
Two preliminary questions were Taisea n tns y
| The ean,e. The drut was that a. the tn1nnctlot
I lad been grated In the supstme Cont, this II IN
fsrlor onr gss rresladed '5o% S hscsass aeex a ~
/ 91aeistood it. the order al the snpeltoE our
provided for this very consideration. The s:eont
ot these oe|sson. ~ .na' Inc .n tnas u, ceps
tat tai y lstieE oi later dasa tho rs'ro'd com
PIX %bp a rouIt examined the letter claimed to
The act Of revoe ation. ard found that II Wae no
: equivalent 10 such a revocation; there WAs n
: upup shcsc poice--it contaiaed a mere scqae.
o thar the new company should snspend ~ ops.ss !
lions 1n,i s9ona tSon
y reyo n lawyers construction Of tho contract
There aas no denial Of the liccnsc. and It vas C
Court to so9'sr TafseGf vas 70 TTep
q 1eyoestiou did not como too late. The tat
!, therefore, Of the motion must turn IN re son
). the eonlrset Il tho ra:zosa company With e =
hs ,et Sst
=. warranted partnetahfp between Two cotpolanGoo
a chartered to curry di1eEc1t hpsncss1 aud ~
tied IL he teopu Of their acton o5 tho laneoai
70 sut H. con.t would not dis.o1,e tho inlaaett:
- upon these Gtolndr, but wooid tonssdcr inc I9!
\! ha eorsiderod to 10 the Illegal contract. Tht
~ Il was 10 bo considered whether an ltrephrsb
damage was e ee done 70 aae ,H Metesn s,' en enn
Z should eli Tor the ia,e.t:renee q GhsHcel!s
1h II II af0se M "a ay
u. VA only to be considered whethrr tho use Of :
lfs piles. orEed bs the railroad company and ~, ~
IS by the telegraph company under az fnVal
s1- aerceu,eht s. t6r con,cndlng corporation, WOO
le Vosk N irreparate tljury % tho ensang &, e.
o. | nsnv The Court thought that no buto 1919
q, rnn oecur, because, even In this case atatts1
oI bad bern rrodoc, q, showing. tue, moments
TO loat time by the accidents OF teleRTfphY.
he thpurbt where these were ehoWn there could
cd no diificuty in showing the value Of service.
l. a. to nake a caso At iaW. Such esse @ neiGE M Al
&c to be maar 1t was not bis duty, ~ Cntneeitos.
re II 1terfrse The Court thought tola Was os13
I'D Quarrel between two persons cugaRtd II the sa'
IS. 6uel1ess. II each was courteous 70 re oihef
4 ttfepAtAble injury Could occur. wherefore 4e
cined toat 1t Was not his province to act. The
l. innrtion was ordered TO be dissolved.