Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1880-03-25
THE WIRE MAR.
DECISION FOR THE ATLANTIC AND
PACIFIC,
Judge crsnmet's 0plnion Prompt
Removal q Wire Incidents Of the
Cutting Sleeping With the
Polss--A New lnlanetioa

~, l,,,oetioa.
= 4t,' w. s''-'
z5 0iI - 80
IA was announced In yesterdays hEo-
,srrR tbat Judge Cranmsr, would, at 10
o'clock that morning, deliver bis epin-
ion IN the case Of the application LOT .
OF the induction granted the
baltimore and Ohio Railroad Company,
the Western Union and At
lantic and Pacific Telegraph Companies
lar interfering with or Ia any way mo
LISTING it, wires. i,itfc
A. that hour the Municipal court
,,on, hsid die attorney and individuals
Z; 49,. '.e-as,aJ IN ala case Judge Cranmer
' i;ss SsH .ha ;rinnctjon. delivering the
SoIlnw;nS onioion = G8'Fii
ml'.;,s ,ana.roa ,non tho part of
hmu ,s',;, nj viii n view of showing
me sotnpaisn ~ , vb;ch were
tne mature " .us s. soa sst 80 - defendant
oolec,eu ~ ~ ny ,ts,n contested
ana lhe t'sns ~ ,ss s.s s whv the in.
AIRY 'no tosST - bs d,ssoivad sui-
Junction snouiu hos W "''N'''SN -
ncientf ,,,;..,;on Cor
Inc party masking ~ APPnss n,,iv a.
an injunc.'on 70 prss aaa hn, ~ he fre.
Know what n;s i'sJ's aiJ anniica-
pareu ~ tne Nni1 W " .ish,s CO.. tba writ
ton 10 support tnoSe l'S"sS, IL, n. 10.
Is harsh remedy anu snou.u uo
sorted 70 ohiy ~ cases "nv hs,a,;aI ana
is invoked 70 prevent s st;s has aIr. a
posltlyeinJuiy,a 9r 4, 90 ~ other words
o'Surreu " ynu ~ ,narshio
where the INJURY 70 Hiepaaao. n,;,,a
Inc geheIa' Iu'e S;iiois,;on If an in.
mouon 'y 'u ,sa rson;rament to do
lune.on TIE ones,;on of a contin.
% - u,sa. ,o,;an ~ dissolve arose and
uahee on ihJ.,on h y" oasa 81 RsdiorTs
was ueclue9 ~ S ,sno,,ed in lat
s1 ois 's' Wnuto,d naco This
hehihg anu ui ;"sni ne ;n;nnction
Was u mo,'on a ~ u us' ON a hond which
W s.y P'SSI H. -, rcb aes money az a
was siy,en ID ~ dh;o. tLat in conse.
iaes " a.. n,aris,snca of surveys
quehce " wy - 49, narsons pr;or 10
u'aue ~ o.n" aarnJ ,hat tbe ga
.lat y pais,, ,h ap tas,s,or If the com.
t1'e y, n'u n,.IJ w 49, 10 acres mart Of
pla'na's' TGa N' al honobt They
.he Iaes $500 ~ av;dapce Of
~ sis.a3 ~ Mat and Ger.
.m,s, wn'Ih somos'' si',j w. surveyor
.Ih.a'e ~ jound among
~. ~ ''e - - wn,;ar, Psdford bni
us Papu,s ~ nn,h.n,;cated
WIFI TSu We mv dan;si tha allegations in
hni da,.anJad nroof ~ their
the pi'' anu ueu'ah'eu P'oo' " w
truth. e.. oon,;n,anco
motion Was Iu"uo Vl 'on'uuansv,
on tue eround .nat Nv WV neS' ha
theY cou,u SLOW 'ho auvsas'on
true, Mniun WY nav WV" ''1
i'n n uV,us n ,;,ro,oa ,yara
Ing oo!eo''ona W . ~ So :. was ;ncon'
'iaue w ,s H. ursc,;ca Of tb;s conrt
H. repIv 10 this was that the answers
haJ heen lately fled and that until then
49, non,nIa;nants we're NOT informed
&c Tho no,nts intended 10 he controyert.
ed "N
The court saws; "The reasons assigned
for n continuance are not sufficient To
;nJnca tha CONT m depart from the gen
arsl rnle. and This il, never TO continue
a motion for the dissolution OF an In.
Junction nnless from some rery great
,,ecss,;In becanse the court ia always
oncn 70 grant and, of course, to rein.
s,ate an Injunction whenever Il shall
annaar propa,to do 40. and because,
taa the nlaYnsiiT should always be ready
10 nrnye his biJln The Injunction was
dissolved y
Is there the existence of a ray great
,,,cSssily I'm this case that the motion for
n continuance should prevail3 Such a
necessity. looking now only at the bill
and answers. and the affidavit OF
Mr. Tracey, does not appear, because
tbe answer il TO be taken as true, as the
Allegations Of the answer denies all the
eonIlies OF the bill.
III .mao,i, 4, ,a,orol ,a,ms s,a,es
INV a'nua'n ~ so"y'" IN oom ho
.nat ,ne m.Je "nd ,,a a,,ana,;nns Of tho
s s.,o'e =, ,bnss nsr,;crIars in which
ans"s's 80 ,ha aiIesa,;ons II the
,ngy so h s;'0 .n e. TS;s - the
D'Ii can oe u,sp,o.eu, ~, " ,ha h;u r.,
sa'Iie n'h,''. WY s"''o ~ ,ha na.s Of
tne ai,' s.; "oe a, IT,, ,ha =. r,;cnIar facts
any pa..S ~" Iii o~sar s 10 Pnt awsn
.se. ia Ia W. annaar 20 ~ 20 ha q
u u ulu ~ moau s ,Pua,,,,o,a ~ a,jo~
s.'m,se p'. ~ la II th;s msnnar Tho
su aIhau' )" He,a' ;n;nrn,; w." whan he
d,Ss hos Jenr;yeJ this com Main.
on, ~ Oh lie sonI,able grounds Inv fnllv
s"; 49,. w. y" nd nns;,;vaIv Ssnving ali The
eouities of the bill, where there is the
existence of mo very great necessity"
for doing so. =
But it is claimed by the complainant
that on the showing ofthe aflidavits ten
dered and read in these proceedings, and
the general qualifications fled by II to
the answers In the case, that 1t has a
right 10 the continuance, and that the
Court has no discretion but to allow it,
and In support of their views cite the
Conrt 10 the case of Hazlett * Mcmillan
Of nj. In 18th West Virginia, y. AGA.
The court in this case in It's opinion
shows that where replication is filed
denying the allegation OF the answer,
then the general rule In equity does not
obtain. Ii says: sour Code does not
give the same force or reflect 10 an answer
where there is replication thereto, that
was given TO an answer under the rules
OF equity piior 10 its adoption" In
view OF the above decision, the objection
on the part OF the defendants, that 1t 10
not competent for the plaintiff to file