The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1884-06-20
THE INJUNCTION CASE.
Deposition Of William j. Pal
mer Read Yesterday by
Judge Bennett.
INTERESTING EXTRACTS.

sident Of the defendant compan,
from the time Of Its organic alton il
October 1870, till the SIh OF Angus
1888, and he il till a member of tn
board of directors, and that at fht
time OF the organic alton of the plain
tiff company by the consolidation @
three several poratiOns, on Oh
about July 21st 1881 be became, anC
haS ever since been its president.
Prior to the consolidation and al
early as the winter OF 1880, 8 plan
was formed for the construction OF
railroad from the Colorado state
line westward to Salina at the ives
tern base of the Wasstch range OF
mountains in the Sewer Valley OF
Utah, and Of certain other lines in
connection there with, az future
developments might render desire.
able. With that end In view the
Sewer Valley railroad company one
OF the companies by the consoIida-
ton whereof the plaintiff company
was formed, had been created pur
suant to the la IS Of the Territory of
Utan, which company had proceeded
to some extent to carry out the
objects for which it was created,
had caused surveys to be made and
gradiugs to bs done on the lines se>
lected for its road or track from the
Colorado border to 5 alma by the
most direct route indicated toy it's
charter.
The defendant company contem-
plated aud projected about the same
time, the extension of its Colorado
lines from the South Arkansas, via
Marshall Pass, westward to Gunni-
son City and the Colorado border:
and 1t was the intention that the
lines 80 projected should connect at
a common point on the Colorado Dor
der, and that over the respective
lines would be established a through
line Of transportation. Subsequently
this plan was changed at the in
stance Of the defendant company,
which desired first that Salt Lake
City. Utah, and later Ogden,
should be made the objective
points in the fret instance, partly
because of its differences then
with the Union Pact ic, it being
that thereby the Union
Pacific could be better held in check
in its attacks upon the local traffic
oft e defendant company a, Leaf
vile, Gunnison and elsewhere In
Colorado, and partly because at or
about the time the Burlington aud
Missouri River railroad projected an
extension Of its line TO Denver, and
it was expected that thereby lar
ger and more remuneFstiVe business
could be more speedily ecure which
would benefit both roads, but par
the defendant company.
In consequence the consolidation
between the Sewer Valley railroa1 |
and two other companies was de-
upon and carried into eff
'ect, whereby the plaintiff company
vas formed with the rights and
covers to construct md operate
'mong others, the line it has since !
constructed or causej t. be conqtruc-
ed.
That tn. change of programme
esuliej practically in the susCen
ion or TEN p0rary aba doament of
york on that p triton Of the line be-
ween Green River and salina.
Vhereon large amount Of monies
ad been alre ady exp nded for
which the plaintiff company became
liable. all of which was we'll known
D the defendant company, while it
7as generally understood that
either the road of the plaintiff /
tmrany nor that of the defendant
west of Gunnison would
u some time 10 come be remunera-
I've unless the other was built, and
nat when built q through line of
transportation would have to be
sta blished over them and the rosds
managed and operated in har-
lony. Noes agreement was made or
understanding had between the
or their respective direc
'rs respecting eth r the traffic or
OF the lines until about I
1882. when the proposition !
closer al lance, { wit; in a lease s
Id the guarantee of bonds was
'st made by Charles F. Woerish-
fer, who then Was, ever since has G
sen, and still is a director of the q
stendant company and was then
% Iinent and now is the cont oil q
6 member in .he management I
no has since by his direct lnvits- a
On and fundamentally procured
aided the admission into the
ard OF directors of the defendant
mpiny, OF every member now in
e board, including Frederick
)vejoy, the present president, snd
cepting Adolph Engler and my
II. A
At that time consolidation was
It discussed ; it had been previously
entioned, and been found imprac. A
'sble for several reasons, among v
ners these: There was no basis
any such consolidation; the de-
1ds1t company h I'd large mill
e IN operation which it was at the
ae extending in various dire ctions
reach points by which it could
ntrol the business, and some of its v
ZEE were not yet remuneYatiye.
d the road of the plaintiff com. "
ny had not YET been built. and IFS T
oaelty TO earn and to be operated
,nomically had not yet been T
ted.