The Indianapolis sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1880-1904, 1885-01-18
COURTHOUSE LOCALS.
Judge Walker Grants the B. and o,
Perpetual Injunction Against the
Telephone Company-Ira
Miles Gets g Three
Year Sentence.

The Brandon Hammond damage suit Is stun on
trial by jury in Room s.
Henry Helm took Judgment yesterday against
C. F. Presener. for s55s.75, and William c. Capp.
for s57s.55, against Koran r Allen, IL Room /,
both on notes.
In the suit of Allen q. Norris ct sl W. H. c.
Holloway ct 81. Judge Taylor yesterday refused
motion for rev trial and entered indgmenton the
verdict for $3.50
Judge Norton yesterday gave Arthur Lafount-
aipe, Charles Lurber. and Edwin Meyers lecture.
ard released them on promise of good behavior.
They were arrested for petit larceny.
Ira Miles she thief who took Mrs Jearies'
watch, chain and ring. valued a. s!2s, from her
room in the Brunswick Hotel. "Wednesday. was AZ
raisned yesterday in the Criminal Court aud Was
given three years in the Northern Prison.
Charles Z. Schrader and Sophia Schrader IS ex
ecutrix OF the estate OF Charles r. Schrsder, do
ceased, have fled suit against the Eagle Machine
Works for damages growing out OF a violstion OF
contract. Charles r. and the decedent entered
into written contract with the defendant to
learn the trade IN the woodworking department
on the 10th of January. 1852, the term OF appren-
tceshfp TO run four years. at the end of which
time an extra sum was 10 have been paid for faith
ful performance and steady work furnished. In
January, 1854, Charles r. SchFader was DISCHARGED
without cause. according TO the complaint and 1T
also alleged thst the 0eoedent died in May fOlloSs
ing the agreement Demand Is made for $500.
The case OF the B. and o. Telegraph Company
VS.. The Central Union Telephone Company came
up before Judge Walker yesterday on an argu-
ment on demurrer 10 the complaint. This was
tie Injunction suit fled by the plaintiff TO COM
pei defendant to rent it telephones for its bust
ness. so that it could be placed upon an equal
footing with the Western Union Telegraph Com
pany In business matters The Telephone Com
pany pleaded that it was operating with
TELEPHONES leased from the American Bell Tele-
nh Hssf that har a. in
their lease providing that they should not rent
telephones TO any other telegraph company than
Western Union Telegraph Company owns a large
amount OF the stock OF the Central Telephone
Company, ana that the American Bell Telephone
Company should be brought into court 10 answer
for Itself under the conditions OF the lease
il was also claimed that under the
terms of the lease the defendant would
forfeit all right to the use of the Bell Telephones
snd that the city in dsnger of losing the OF
thai The proyiso referred 10 I'm the lease was I'M
just discrimination ard against puh bite policy. sud
therefore void; also. that the telephone company
having become established in the city 1t has as
sumed all the fu ties rights i'm munifiss and bar
oeps Of common carriers and having become
any branch Of its service having made
tie citizens dependent upon il for services rhe
pauy must rent rs instruments 10 the Dlainuus
and grant it all the copveniences and privileges
upon the same terms as Is granted 70 other cor
p0rstioDs and individuals. The injunction Was
made perpetual, and the attorneys for plaintiff
were INSTRUCTED to prepars q decree and bring II
court records. The defendant has signlhef
fits intention of appealing the case 20 the highest
court. and the probability is that IL will % the
United States Supreme Court. The attorneys for
the defense desired the order OF The Cour. 10 be
withheld until they can settle the matter in the
higher courts, but this was refused by the Court,
and the injunction is in i0rce from the date OF the
rendition of its decision. The ruling upon this
latter point is IN accordance with the ruling of
the General Term OF the superior Court in the case
OF G. w. Spahr et al vs. J. H.Webster. where Spahr
and others desired that the order of the Court be
not enforced until the appeal was taken and set
tied in the Supreme Court in which case the petit
fion WAS denied.