, 1876-12-22
What the Metropolitan Ought to
Pay Its Rival.
Same 11ore Testimony About Those
Low and swampy South
Park Lands.
Business Man Who Complains
of His Wicked Partner.
A1ibel Case Goes BY Default.--A Husband
Dsfrauded ty His Wife,
Record Of Judgments and New Suits..-
Cases in the Criminal Court.
THE METROPOLITAN,

STILL MORE TESTIMONY.
sti,, more evidence was adduced yesterday morn
,,g before Jne5e Rogers as 10 the value of tha
uost interesting aud hi@h-pricsd franchise of TIL
Vest Division Railway Compauy,-the right TO e1
r,rdr all horse railways from Vest Lake and souts
Canal Streets
The nrst witness vas Mr John A. Tyrrelt, capi
,,,;st and 1oan- broker, member Of the drnl o
Vrigh, i Tyrsell, and director Of the West Di
.i.iop Company. He thought the injury to tht
tonnanv BY tie Establishment OF rival line Q,
lake and Canal streets would be SO, 600 year, o.
,.,talized, $3.50, VG0 to $780, 600 for the ninety
zine years.
Ar ". II. O,inston, the Secretary and Treasnr
er of tue West Division Company, and connected
with II for thirteen years, was the second witness
The aprnal receipts from the Clinton~street Iins
we're shout $40, 600, and The expenses were nearly
tse same. The receipts on the Randolph street
line we're about $1ii, 600 for tbs past eleven
months, OF Sl6o, 600 year. The expenses were
.bo.t S345 day, OF Sis. 925 3 year. The re.
fejrts OF the lndiana-street line were SSl, 900 .
year. and the expenses ST., 900. 4 rival line on
Lake street would make tie Randolph street line
Improbable. and rival line on Cauai street would
,ure the receipts OF the Clinton street line one
asu The riskt Of exclusion OH Lake and Caual
streets for ninely nine years Would be worth about
s5tO, U0u.
DAVID Il. GAEt Wa6 called 10 prove tue execution
VI bond executed by the Chicago City Railway
Company in lcaa.
TIE next witness as to valne was i. C. Turner,
the President Of the North Side Kaiiway Company.
Lake street woufu De to diminish the Randolph
erect line ~ per cent OF the indiana -street line 10
per cent ana Of the tlintons street line about one
half The right Of exclusion on Lake uhd Canal
streets would be worth sun the Interest gu which
xVYld annually produce au amount equal to the
Yearly loss caused by such diversion. The witness
estimated The annual loss at about SGO, 600, hut
the amount of tue principal, the interest OF which
VAS equai TO StU, UUO. would be dependent on the
1z.e OF interest, whether i, :, or IL per cent.
Ar. Franklin pasmalee, one Of the original in
corpofStoss OF the Chic1e0 City Railway Company,
VAS uret witness the stand in the afternoon.
Tie Company complied with all the ordinances VI
the city in giving what bonds were required.
ut. Moody. OF the City Clerk office was recalled
and 1estntd thai DO notice given by the Metro
poiitau Company lis intended application for
ordinance. ..-...
the LEGAL ad.iscr OF franklin Par1ua1ce. drew all
itr ordinances. and recollccted that the City Rail
way Company gave the bonds required by the ord~
nances ut lt3S and 1853.
CVnEts. e1-Fresldcut Of the West Division Railway,
AID Director in the same, was the next witness.
Tue effect Of rival line On West Lake street
would BE- to destroy nearfy all the profit to both
Companies- IT would also draw something f1o:1
tie Indians street line. From 80 TO Is per cent Of
the ,rzsel would be diverted from the Randolph
txeet lfne Il f3fAl Nne on Canal street would
IKE over ,0per Cent Of the travel from the Clin-
1en Street line. and would GLnihiiatc i1s value.
Tie value Ut the exclusion Lake and Canal
tt.eets wuud be worth from $780, QUO to $4uc, 0OO,
ar:ng the eSi51Aate on tue ret profits the Company
woulu make for the nincty-nlae years it no snch
rlyai line WAS established. The exclusion of Lake
Etreet would be worth twice Is much as that on
lanai street.
This clneed the evidence to go to the jury, the
reservns the right to put in some
more proof in regard 10 that disputed bond OF the
Metropolitan Company, which seems to have been
aasscd froru CLERK to Council without ever receis~
NJ the necessary approval.
Judge lawrence waive'i the opening argument
,c behalf Ut his client. aud tue remainder OF the
:y was occupied hy Mr. Aver in summing up 10
be Jurr. l1e viii conclude his argument lnis
1oTulu:.