Morris tribune. [volume] (Morris, Minn.) 1880-2000, 1883-11-10
SlCoruio Tui6urrc.
THE MANITOBA AND FARGO SOUTH.
ERN.

L
Wahpeton, and the Fargo Southern
road, is this: w. A. Kindred formerly
owned the right-of-way at the point
where the Fargo Southern is seeking
to cross the Manitoba road, and it is
said that at the time of constructing
the Manitoba, Mr.. Kindred promised
to deed the right-of-way to the Mani
toba for a sum that X. might deter
mine to fix upon it. The amount was
fixed, rendered, and refused, and X. III
the mean time decided it to the Fargo
road; upon the strength Of which, the
Fargo road attempted crossing. The
Manitoba refused to permit the cross
ing, because no application had been
made according to the laws OF Dakota,
have the damages to the Manatoba
assessed; the ownership by the Fargo
road of the right-of-way was not sutfl-
cient according to law to permit of its
crossing without a proper assessment
of damages.
The Fargo road had arranged short
pieces of rails, without the proper
frogs, for the crossing, and then began
to hew away at the rails of the Mani
toba road to cut them in two, without
having given any notice, so as to lay
down its track across the Manitoba,
and in such a manner as to make the
Manitoba track useless, and to compel
the Manitoba to always keep the cross
ing in repair at its own expense. The
Fargo road had put its cross rails down
when Supt. Kempt ordered an engine
TO hitch to them and pull them away.
At this point, a temporary injunction
was granted by Judge Hudson, at
Grand Forks, restraining the Manito-
ba from interfering with the cOnstruc-
ton of the Fargo road across its track,
and an attempt was made to serve
these injunction papers upon the Man
itoba Station Agent ut Wahpeton, but
the Manitoba road holds that no pa
pers were served upon it, and hence
there was no injunction for it to obey,
and continued to proceed as If no in
junction had been heard Of, and for
this reason it could not be in contempt
of Judge Hudsons court, or the injunc-
ton issued by him. At this juncture
of affairs, the Manitoba road sent its
attorney, L. c. Spooner, who resides
at Morris, on its line, to Wahpeton to
look after the roads interests, and MIR.
Spooner Immediately proceeded to
prepare papers on the part of his road
and presented them properly to Judge
Hudson for an injunction restraining
the Fargo road from interfering with
or crossing the Manitoba road; when
Judge Hudson refused to hear Mr..
Spooner, or his application for injunc-
ton, because the road he represented
was in contempt of his court in refus-
ing to obey the injunction he had IS
sued for the Fargo road, Mr.. Spooner
asked the Judge what evidence he had
before him that his road was in con-
tempt, or had refused to obey the
courts injunction, and the answer he
gave Mr.. Spooner was, the columns of
a Fargo newspaper. Mr.. Spooner
sought to demonstrate with the Court,
saying the reports in a newspaper
were, and could not be legal evidence
upon which the court could base any
legal action, that there were nothing
in it's columns to show it was truthful
statement, but Mr.. Spooner found it
useless to press his motion. Mr..
Spooner then asked the Judge why he
refused to hear him through with his
argument, and the answer he received,
was that the Fargo Southern was 60
ing to be built any way, and there was
no need of his talking about it. Mr..
Spooner then returned to the seat OF
war at Wahpeton, when the Manitoba
prepared to defend itself. The Mani
toba road has at this attempted cross
ing, side-track upon each side of the
main track, and it placed an engine in
the middle of two long trains and run
one train upon each side track until
each engine was upon the Fargo cross
ing, and there disrailed each engine,
and disrailed loaded freight car at
each end of the trains on the side
tracks, and then placed loaded
train headed by an engine upon the
main track, the engine Immediately
upon the Fargo crossing. The injunc-
ton granted by Judge Hudson re-
strains the Manitoba from interfering
with the Fargo construction, except
ing in the prosecution of it's business,
and running it's trains. The Manito-
ba claims that this exception author
ICES it to prevent the Fargo from cross
ing its road. We cannot see how
Judge Hudson is going to justify his
action in refusing to hear Mr.. Spoon
er's motion. He could have heard
him, and then refused to grant his
motion but he would not even do this
much. According to what we are able
to learn, the Fargo Southern is not
seeking to stand upon it's legal rights,
but is enormously trying to force
things. The argument upon the pre-
liminary injunction came up yester-
day, at Grand Forks. We have not
been able to learn the result.
LATER.-Mr. Spooner appeared at
Grand Forks, with associate Judge
Clark, in behalf of the st. p, M. & M.
road, to argue the motion of making