, 1875-05-06

being entitled to appear when they ato th con-
f"'i froun my hsothioti. and to po ad7issa 10 ills
case, tnl shl'l do nothing to cut on debate.
Hut, Il ia contatIded on tbs part OF tho eity asI
understand, thst talts Court has no jurisliosioa
at ali in Ibis easo-tbat 1t La all exra. judicial.
II 30. II can 10 vory readily shown by authorities,
md without ! vary great amount Of argument.
/ therefore, propnbo 70 ltvo this caso tako the
course which I indicated yesterday. Tho motion
tho' motion may appear for tie city; md whom
tho gentlemen WHO como OIL toslalE of the city
argue tho matter they can h!ate ali their o0jec-
tions 10 tho supplemental bill. and also to the
original bill, that IL, 30 far an they choono to
state them. I have intiuated already to coun.
sol that cannot OCCUPY moro than t1ny to this
argument. am willing to eve tho counsel for
tho conplalnanta thtco additions, hours, aud tho
counsel for the defendants four hours and half,
II they desire It..
Judge D.ckoy-1 znggtst that IL IA tho regular
NODE in question of thts kind. first
TO xaow WHAT wk HAIL DISCUSS.
The supplemental bill shali DO stricken
1fss ssass1on s' '' Tho o9sIo.l N" ''''S S sea es
10 tho Jurisdiction OF the mastor presented in It,
state that We have m sn.ver prepared which We
propose 10 tllo, aa va have = right 10 do. upon
tlla jensing Of tho application fur Injunction.
Therefore, I desired that tic Court pass upon
my motion first.
Iho Court think IL propor to bear the Oh"
Iectious IT you psopose to file an answer.
Sir. TuleY--ao fsr "a tho associate counsel arc
coacorned (storre, cloudy. Root. and hmaclf).
wo uuderstand that We represent tho City Of
Chicago. Wa arc not retained by any Aldermen
m Individuals, but repreeent them In thor
onfcial capacity M composing tho Common
CouneIl.-a political! Board, aud part of Ito
withdrawing their objections, We Ars not aHtfe
tliht thoro las been my contempt Of Court, aud
we aak no fsyors in tl'at regard. Wo stand
strictly upon our rights as counRelors and MON.
!, ucra or the bar In tho proaeucs OF tho Court.
ih!s iB motion to striko tho supplemental bill
from tho lilo, motion that the Court ought to
l,onr, bcca.Re It wns distiuctly stRtcd yesterday
tllat Ito supplemental bill contained only tie ac-
rocuived 1t yesterday {Tues1ay) At o'clock, and
read II. NC fouutl It contained entirely new mat
Ter. Air. 1uloy then desired 70 point out Wherein
! II was not p supplemental! tlll.
| lilo Court hAu no objection, but reiterated Lib
intention to limit lie discussion.
| Slr. Yuley thou road tho bill. aud snbae.
gucntly sad that, as ho understood tho postion
og tho defendants, 1t WAS that, 40 far ~ tho
original bill was concernod, that Court nsvar
had, and --
! NEvEn COULD HAVE. JrRIsD1oTioa,
| or any right 10 issue writ OF injunction. As TO
tho Rppamentnl bill, they took 10 such position.
II thu rama matter had bee. ret out in tbs origl-
mi ii as lad boen SO. ont in tas supplemental
bill, difcrout question might have arisen. lie
submitted that tho ,nosion to s.Tito tho lattor
from tho tiloH was nell talon. OIL account OF the
~ I.'.a tsa ten ~ ~ t..,tnd n msto fhsns ty,nr
monn ia".. ~ 6io ~ .nnnt.mcntai hll IL
tleta;l matters occurring fiucs ths lll,ns
fn,r ~ nijrroiioua which nutht Ia l,arc bsct, In
t,, ,r;.1,na 1 wt,;r "rnso bcfor. Il
waa yn ied Nhn ti,o,rt ,',e Cnnrt would strika II
f.nm ;I,r flies. Thoy aestrei 10 kuor wLat 20
tsom tt.o rnnrt wnn1 take ,,sf,ra iecidinr whcih.
~ ,hny .ro romI ia INV answer Tmn cnror.,ion
Sonrsn, wa ,riatakan in saving thar tbs anawe,
10y nntsst aa, "nn nronascd Il ia nnt TheY vera a
1,ar;,,r m it, II the e.nntomon,al btlf Ind oon.
.i,,13 o,,Ix ,.i,nt Iunna + = .yrnnua said It did
.isn xoi,s} ,r.'td nnf hovo tliad anw snswa-
{ l"i ia "a + Iavrrnre aaii thc ,nnisnu waa
| s' ~ rYvnaornty1ny nyr
.rhov ,,od . rirht fo i!a tha bil nlaneut7ont1v o
,nH o'osr ,,,ear ~ r1.r b.,ora ,,,o ansre
man @''s1 mst,nr ~ nrocant ~
hnwor.r in conscononca IF tbo ncndrncy Of tnG
;ntnucti1,n they fad arpltod for leaye to smoni
."n nv anI no,, l,s otl,sr sih eoms In on con-,
.u oitt n,ia NV 'n.ia w. c,,,,n,n ,,o nrcrsi H.
p%'esn se,an ,nI ] ~ cYtcnd il snanat NV nartr
s,m,,Iy r,,,nu tI,e m,ttors alleged 10 she supn!e
~ tha arr,naI p,,, iii, md moved 10 dl,mss ths
IN LUZ rnass @co,,,t,insntn sotnd for . cnntnn
a. ~. - t1.,i, tmnotiam 10 rtr+ns ~ tbs .tisgs
tinus IN thn or,ainai b,il: mud Tor furtbor Ia
;m"o,,nr a~a,uat H. ci,v hv virtna of III. silera
tinns IN ia n,nuionental l,ili. and that apoiica
I tion vas basod upon rpattcrs which had occurro,
since tho GIinn OF tI,a original bill. They ror,
wiling 10 take the chances for ii, Injunction upol
The original bill as II stood, tho city havinI
bseu nj q a pa,tv, aud upon tho new matter ii
crod in TIM at1n,,anental bill without refot enc
to tbs additional strength that might be given Il
the application hv Tho ALLEGATIONS In tho supple
1nental bill OF what occurred before tho oriRina
bill waB filed. Tllosa matters Comparison Q
yotea) wcro Of no importance.
Mr. Tuley-Wl! tho counsel pormis shs ns'
| matter to be stricken out?
Judge Lawrence-We certainly prefer our Owl
method of conducting our cssa. We shalt
NOT DO 70 ouR ENEMIES ron ADVICE.
Tho Judge then reforred to tho aousae OF pro
ccduro In tllo caso Of the filiug Of . supplement
Al bill. couteuling that rnotlon like That mad
was equivalent to asking tue Court to eays -
, viii boar this spplipat!on. aud. after 1t i
heard, il | am Of opinion that tho no,
mdtter Incorporated into this supplemental bi
should not or could not hara been inoprporste
theroin, tile action Of the Court in refprenco /
tho granting Of the injunction Mill bs based upo
matters In tho otieinR, and supplemental bil
| - hnmn Il