The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1888-03-13

to handled "Q' freight were withdrawn
on Saturday last and the following orders
issued:
can orders and directions heretofore
given by me or by any officer or agent of
this road, which have boon understood as
limiting the interchange bf cars or traffic
with the Chicago, Burlington 4 Quincy
railroad or any OF the roads in that sys-
tenn, are hereby rescinded.
''The business OF receiving and inter-
changing cars and traffic by this road with
the Chicago, Burlington 4 Quincy, and
all OF the roads OF that system will go on
upon the same terms and conditions az
those upon which similar business is done
by this road with other connecting rail-
roads,"
The above order the answer says, has
been in full force since Its issuance and
will be continued and executed. In con-
clusion, the Wabash denies having had
any business transactions or communica-
tions from p. NJ. Arthur, or any one rep
resenting him, and prays thet the petition
be dismissed at petitioners cost.
Respondent in conclusion further says
that he believes that the petition at the
time when filed by the petitioner origi-
mated, not so much in the desire OF the
petitioner to procure a resumption OF the
insignificant and unimportant traffic
which il had given TO the respondent be-
fore the petitioner had been disabled from
transacting any business whatever by the
refusal OF It's employees 10 continue in its
services as aforesaid, as in the hope that
there would result from the filing Of the
petition situation OF affairs in which the
respondent might be rendered practically
incapable OF transacting any OF the busl-
ness OF the Wabash railway whatever, so
that temporarily, at least, large amount
OF such business now done by the respond
ent would be carried 10 the petitioner,
and IL receive the profits thereof in part
compensation for the losees sustained by
il during the time in which II was not able
10 transact its own business. And now
having fully answered said petition, the
respondent prays that the same may be
dismissed at petitioners costs, etc.
After the Wabash's answer had been
read, showing that Receiver McNuta had,
ON Saturday, the 10Th, revoked his pre-
vious instructions and ordered former bust
ness relations with tho 90" road re.
sumcd, Judge Gresham asked the repre-
sentativcs ofthe ~. what position thatleft
them in the suit, and Writ Dexter replied
that the 90" still desired the order from
the court which was originally asked for.
They desired this that they might feel as
sured that the Wabash would not again
refuse TO receive their freight, as they had
already done. They still asked, further,
that the court issue the desired order re.
strainng Chief Arthur and the brother.
hood from ordering or causing strike on
the Wabash or any other rad In conso.
quence Of the action OF those roads In haul.
ing 20" freight Arguments were made
at length In support OF the %" position,
and were answered at equal length by the
attorneys for the Wabash.
At the close Of the Arguments Judge
Gresham practically gay, his decision
when he said that he did not think the
90" had any case In court. "rhe Wa
bash has granted you all you ask," said
the judge. at has promised TO receive
your freight, and now you ask the cour,
TO issue an order Furnishing the Brother
hood Of Locomotive Engineers for an al
legged crime which they dciy, and agnins
the wishes OF the general manager Of tn,
road, who Is an officer oi this court. >
While the Judge thus indicated what hii
decision would probably be, he announced
that he would take the matter under ad
yiscment
The prevailing opinion In hecourt.room
after the decision was, that the Judge
would refuse 10 issue any order touching
the action OF Chief Arthur or the brother.
hood, ON the ground that II Is beyond his
Jurisdiction and properly regulated by In,
State laws.