Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-08-11

would not be tried until after 1t was
too late to bring the suit here In our
district court against Slattery, Cleve-
land Il Cameron. We at first thought
We would try to reconvene In the case
and make Cleveland & Cameron par
ties to the suit, but after due rtflec-
ton, we came to the conclusion that
the law was against us in that. The
courts here are unlike most states; In
our district our court meets
but twice a year. SO you
see we had another chance at the
Slattery case at Dallas, but for good
and sufficient reasons the case was
continued, having been called just as
the court was about TO close, and sew
eral cases were like this; not expecting
trial, had TO continue, and there being
30 many ahead Of this one 1t was not
thought for moment IL would he
reached. A great many lawyers differ
Cameron's suit ut this place. Now,
unless Mr.. Slattery moves here
think IL rather dangerous
undertaking. Now the question arises
whether or not 10 bring the suit here.
II we do they will plead TO the juris-
diction. We may beat them on that,
because the contract was to he per-
formed here, but the bond does not
SAY that II Is TO be paid here. Sup
pose we beat the case In the district
court, and they are pretty apt 10 not
try the case at the first term OF
the court, some cases have been
on the docket here for years,
then the parties, after the trial, see
proper las they will to appeal the
case. Our supreme court Is considera-
bly, behind. Suppose, then, ut the end
of about less than three years from
now, the supreme court in its majesty
considers II the law we had no juris-
diction In this court in said case, then
where would we be? We could bring
suit at Waco, but the only answer
nece, sary would be to plead the stat
ute of limitation.
have tried to do my duty In
this matter and To work for the best
interests of Fort Worth. i do not
dertalxen by me. There Is plenty of
time left for me 10 bring the suit at this
term OF the court, and we will get
trial just as quickly as If the suit had
been brought several months ago. AS
to the suit % Slattery W.. City
of Fort Worth at Dallas,
have but little to say; 1t
is more farce than lawsuit. 1t
must have been the "Jumbon of the
Third ward VINO said In that article
against ne that M yet we had not
caused any cost bond to be filed. That
Is about IA true as most
OF the balance of the
propositions that II becomes necessary
Tor me TO answer. If the gentlemant?)
viii consult the clerk of the federal
court it is my opinion that he will
find out that Slatttry gave cost bond
last winter. ! suppose that
this jumbo was probably
afraid he would not get his witness
! fees. am here to inform him he
was witness for the city, and thecity
would have its costs TO pay anyway,
1t matters not what the results of the
suit would he. Next time | believe
that will not trouble that gentleman
about going To Dallas, rs he IL so
averse To 1t and seems To blame
me because he has to go there
are others by whom | can prove the
facts equally rs well rs by him. Is
/ there anything wrong In this matter;
of slattery, Cleveland Il Cameron?
We have three years In which 10 bring
| the suit
This one disposed of, the next one
that presents Itself TO us is that of j.
Strein, Il poor man, an architect by
profession. and, by the way, II hard
working, honest German. 1t is
charged that allowed judgment to be
4 taken by default. II seems that Mr..
j. G Suei93 had delivered to
the city of Fort WORTH NBlans
and specifications for u Geftain
school building on the other
side of the railway donation,
bids were received from the different
contractors, and that of Mr. j. q.
Surein was, by the city council,
adopted aud the bid accepted Ac-
cording TO his plans and specifications
he did the work nicely and should
have received pay for IL. 1t was not
his iault that the party who
got the contract tailed To
make his bond. The city council
paid him for this work Sl5, which he
said he would receive as part pay, and
told them he was entitled to 800.
subsequently he brought suit. WAS
lust getting up out OF IA spell OF the
typhoid fever. Mr.. Chapman, my
partner, was attending to my husi-
ness. He claims, and so told me at
the time, that when Mr.. Furman's
court met he had an agreement with
MIR. Brantly, the attorney for the
plaipuif IN the case, To try the same
ON Friday following. Mr.. Brant-
ly says the agreement WAS on Satur-
day. Mr.. Chapman went To the trial
of the case on Friday, ana Mr.. Brantly
being absent, and II leing general
rule for the attorneys for the defend.
ant 10 always be willing for continu-
ance, said lac passed the case. On the
next day Mr.. Brantly said that this
was the day set for the trial and
demanded of the court his
trial, which the court saw
proper to grant. We, not Knowing
about the matter, In two or three DAYS.
or something like that, Mr.. Fuiman
suddenly left for New Mexico. We,
not Knowing anything of any iudg-
ment, naturally supposed that moth
ing had been done. We could have
gone TO Justice Zinn's court to have
seen, hut We never thought Of any ad-
vantage being taken. When Mr.. Fur
man returned and we had found out
about the Judgment the ten DAYS for
appeal had expired, aud | for
one was not prepared In
make the proper afIiuavit
In case for certiorari. When the ex-
eeution was presr nted to the city coun.
Gil my advice TO them was to not paw
II, because they had taken advantac.
of us IN To the trial of the cause, but |
think yet that Mr.. q. Sreiu N enti-
tied to something more than SIS. hut
before iinishing about this matter M.