, 1881-03-23
THE COURTS.
Arguments in tho University Case
Before Judge Drummond.
Interesting Decision OH Spiritualfsn,
nnd Undue Influence.
Now Suits, CONCESSIONS, Judgments,
Et,.

comp.ny nrainst thu University of chlssHo
munv ,Jrlnya. l,or,,rn l,,l1,, ,)rI,m,poud
"x''s W. "en's .. not"fe '',"su ~ ns"t',n.u. ~
rcn nd tho ] "'asts SHo' Of :. a. ]. Fowler vi u md t. i.
,rc . .' ,' pr ihse nr
thnn that til tho suit III mo stnte cosart, lio
then nrE"ol tliAt tho Ming of tho b!l! IN tue
.,a ,s",s ~" M's ,t', n%a y, 'u1 '1,rrsa,cr
1"r,s,it,,I,,n- ,.ss amI. nc'.'r,., ~ b" Saryl,o
1ar'sdsol!on WIS only ac'u.reu ~ su,s'ee a,,
having bget, suryc.i rst, tic atteraad cxcua!vo
{nrisdaotion. Tho Cu,lrt must nctltliro KIch
~ t7 as 'Tor Ill., eMo 9 Il to Ess mi @n
vI.le,' shat until suryeu WIS Ind there was no
dctIon of tho subject ntatser, md tho n,wcr Ut
Bctting tho matters u GontrosesAy. th1t uetSr-
fnsa W natH ~ u 1ssSt'o, Mhon' 1oo h9
Att to rGsts!llli Il proceeding hhout tue sumo
sat. cor d s su tc ] s1ss was wa,r " e
University clni'lscsi Y WIS tnyn;, s,,rh defense
sal'l s!!, m n,o eually well ! u ~, ehG iorsSsurs
il the proceeding ID the Suite Court. s,!t. mo
!it'gation wMs n reilly tho SUNG II both suits
ilc n, information oM bctlalt u tho pcope gct'-
orally anu tno suit III THO stnto Curt, tiiero.
iosu. con.. tlot !,e mni1tM!t1ea Ihnt w'!s ny
CuuR Conhty WIS alus Interested my
!nuro than any otnos county. 0M INC
sttne ntn!GipG tno otnLe attorney u Mliy
~ Sy n!9at nex vaa a.n.,lar ptGecu
MN. NV atMtc ttltututy "!a ,Mut cu!A"tunt ,t
lAw oiecr; h!1t GrcntHru nr the stnt!ite Witn
~: s,,,s,,t III. @ aou. Wms
.no pt pEosen&s & "ia 1,nt Wy: Ivy I. rn.ntn. Eott.
therefore,, hnVltie nrat ont!iiiea 1trlSuictiuh ~
prips sa1s!ce ~ u ptuecss, wy GnInl"Mhnt % WIZ
@ t.tM T, -, tuo uesiIet @ n.!n''ution ", u rr.isGt ri
a5 ~. ~ H. pnseeH o'cE tno s'h'o s"o!ee1
itHtt9f ~ " tn ssato tta.ft; ,, m
t,:S ~ = -. ist II, mo , Y, t "
e III, W.. " .ue e .u.ta H. 1sd ~,
~ tno uleet thAt nptn bn!s VERY nlt4 " tle
sc ss anS 1n % 1nt ro liz oo IN @ ~ NC o. sta ,na Io4Te
cohtei!ueu LINT tho !islaAtloh ~ mo two
' ws nnriSs IT,. 'T % nS nn nnr ~ WI H. y % o
t nn an se., a. ~ tne ,a1 III
!l.S nAt pSem WY Wy ~ ~ Rut tno tl.aMLo.l
@ .ae a,t s u.
14, su ,a i Hnor Sortih ,a',i'
n.ln tnl uuh tn'o MGtuuA y; uy.tAiuE tLe stututt.
ThS service on Fowler, the snrertntendent, WIS
~ ,st.t .,, Even @ tne s1.t "e.i III III
tu vsu nna n & IT, h ~ h ~
cutiul nttetHntt pe lilc9 " tn9 oHto E1uft unuGr
W!Gh W. tao pIupssty G,n ~ pn sa Efen e, u
iho shnula solao ~ Ana uetenn III ,no
reuorni Lons1, y a!a Ho! appehr w wnGtAer
.d,,, tno rconie M q. tho sthto M ,lil illlaols M
WMute1 H. ~ s9t up ibo teicHst9 81 ustrA tifcs Or
. !oa aao W., rgorio M o., Or Eno Sto VI ltios' ano
In shu Static Court tiMt thore wis n,,othor suit
rcudluB. Thnt wo,,ld stup litigation nlsd nc-
Gultipllsn tho SANG result III NJ Injunction here
Smeh ~ eTt.aofa.nrS recny as ~ ln!iilet!oh
m, s,1i1irrnt ~, ..,n ina im,, srr.' l,"r. Tin
return uf tho HhprtI showed tho srrylcu ut tho
process ~ beth suits q, tho suao dnynd
1nG Gonft conia mt suat ao
tnn sn,,,n ri 1nv WhIn. ,rt +, h"h 1S irisiim M
lion? Was it not Il fact II weViit in tletrrll,i.l-
Ing thnt tho ai1nlnl0As In tue 5tAtG Cuurt WIS
turaenle tWehty t!Sh nnoso tnnt II tho Fetlornl