Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1876-01-21


TuE cESTE-l vEKxoNT QU1 wAEEAS1o -
Inc hrs1 business attended 10 uy tine So
preme Lour. i0- franklln county thursday
wa the li.-l-r-raEfo case. g. determine the
va.iii,y OF the election Of directors 9i the
Contra : craoni Railroad Company Oh TIE
ls.h 20. last MAY hon. Daniel Roberts. Of
Darlington aud Hoa + lockwood Hoar.
OF Concord. Aiass4chusett, appeared f1r the
Page board and Messrs P1lanl Fihell snd
Underwood Tor the Smith board
It was commended IN behalf of the smith
board lhac the order Of the Supreme Court
81 Ir- session 10 Washington c0uur7 las
August. only went T. the extent Of requir-
InE them 70 snow cause ~ TINS tern why
tne information should n1i be flied. eouse-
luent'v thev mad made 10 preparation toy
irving the case on it, merits and should
exnec- O continuance u the relator should
be- allowed 10 HE MS Ini1rmauou
Judge lolr. ia behalf % the Page board
slIl Iu4t the determination OF the q question
whether or not the information sl1u-1 be
hled necessarily InrOivss consideration OF
81 Ine iacIs IL the cass. Inc respondent
mas SHOWN 10 cause e. vCI c0uscl ueutlv
1led a. s. thing confessed il cause against
30 should be SHOWN, am Sufficient cause o.
lead the court g. refuse the application.
tha1 vii END The case HI clients nal
taken testimony d. support oi tneIr appl-
cation II covered the case ana the couri IN
hearing % OF the application Il tie the IL
formation would near al that could be al
ducc1 on tnelf si1e N support oi the luilT-
nation after u Wa hle1. Now the other
sIae cannot claim tnat any OF thIs j. sur
urIse 70 then. The testimony has al Oeeu
taken with notice AM under order OF the
court q fact they have no case inst tins
testimony does n0t bring OUT. joy mauv Of
rne Witnesses were their own directors and
oiHcer 1nev have purposeiy neglected o.
take testimony IN their OWL behalf So D. o.
raise tins tecunic4l question OF procedure
AMI claim lack o. preparation % Try the
case itself Bat a. the cont has DO jury
Irlals no method OF taxing proofs save the
one nls clients have pursued unaer the or
DER Of court ard VII mo- have another
term 10 tins county Tor 8 whole year. = cor
FINANCE now would nc q practice defeat
of justice, for u would postpone the deter
mInatI0n of the question a. 10 VINO are d.
rect0rs, beyond the tern fu- which tney
were elected
Alter consultation among themselves. the
Judges announced That a. the question j.
move IhCy would take time O. deliberate
am announce tneir decision 20 the after
noon
Inc Chief Justice said N the Afternoon. that
until the Information Is hled there Is no case
Tor the court 10 hear The REALTORS will nave
leave 10 lie that. unless tne respondents show
cause why they should moi Inc court does
not wish 70 intimate ~ tins time what vii
be the effect OF granting an order 10 file the IL
formation. but II g. ubyIuus that Il tie or
der should be refused 1t vii END the case
Inc respondent therefore. should SHOW
cause why the Information snouid not he
filed
Judge Poland said they could and would.
Judge HOar said the counsel on the other
side ought to indicate wnen they would be
ready Tor hearing. and u EneY would not
the cOurt should IL b.
The court said it would near the csse
commencing AT o clock FRIDAY afternoon.
On Friday m9rEing Dir. Robsrts claimed
the opening, and referred a. authority to
the case Of Daniorth against Hinton - the
old Bethel bank easo-in which Judge Ben
nett decided that the plaintiff should open
and close Il Is reported ID the ssth Yer
mont.
The Chief Justice decided thal the party
who p cited mere 10 show cause j. the one
to now proceed
Mr.. Roberts SAID the other side had said
yesterday that they had taken no testimony
- eVIdence OF their right. Nov II they
bring forward she record OF thelr eiect.ou
they snow cause by a compliance with the
forms Of Jaw. They should not then be al
lowed 10 90 ahead. because we nave the
testimony 10 rebut that showing and the
presumption OF lis validity.
Judge Hoar said the ease OF the Bethel
bank was precisely ike this IN respect Of
procedure The whole hearing was on the
question OF showing cause At the proper
ume We propose % endeavOr 10 show the
court that thai IS tie true method of pre- /
csedIng. This ordeI On them to show cause |
cannot change Ihe Substantive relation Of
Lac parties. Their compliance With tAe OF
6s- makes PrraG face showing. We I
90 he,s IN adapes "rooi 10 snow that they /
are wroDgfully IN possession. an Tue our
den besLg uDon Us, We are entitled by all /
analogy N pxs...ce - open and Close.
Dir. Roberts ciied .ne .S-5n Of wrIts, com 1
mEnding parties To snow cause Wbs --e~a-
iion should not Issue against them. Bnt /
saat .s-al OF summons does not make the I
defendant La party TO establish d case.
Inc eourt said the .etsndan. should take 1
the initiative ID presenting La rsse
Mr. fIiield said case Is pending y - /
unitsd States Circuit Court. in which 4
Messrs. L2ngsol apd Mills are enjoined /
from using the ssx sloeE that was issued. /
Testimony mas been taKsa N tnsi eSse, and /
though We nave NO testimony ID tBis ss-.,
se have a stipulation IN writing with Mr.. J.
koisrfF. allowing Us to use thai testimony !
here.
Judge PslsSs snsa prosssdsd TO read the