Baxter Springs news. [volume] (Baxter Springs, Kan.) 1882-1919, 1890-03-01
The "stone & Cove" Case.

1t appears that there are being cir
culated by those who should know
better, certain untrue statements con-
cerning the "Stone ~ Cove" case and
to the end that a correct understand
ing of the case may be had by those
who desire to be properly informed l
make the following statement:
The first suit in the Stone-Gove
matter was commenced about two and
a half years ago; the second was in
stituted Aug. 20, 1889. The first was
brought for recovery of damages in
the sum of about $4,000 and for an
injunction which, if granted, would
result in the removal of the Baxter
dam or put it in the power of Stone &
Cove to dictate the terms and condi-
tions of a settlement. The second
suit was an action for the recovery of
$2, 400 damages caused by the mainte-
nance and continuance of the dam
during the two years that had elapsed
since the first suit was commenced.
At the time the second suit was begun
it became my duty to appear for and
represent the city of Baxter Springs
in that suit, which did by filing a de-
murrer to plaintiffs petition; this de-
murrer was the only defense of any
character filed up to this time except
an answer filed by Mr.. Dennison up
on behalf of. the Baxter Springs In
vestment Co. do not think any 9TH
er paper has been filed to this day.
Upon the demurrer filed by me in that
case, and upon it alone, the arguments
were made. I nadeas full and search
ing an examination of all authorities
as could find in my own library and
in the libraries at Columbus and SUBJ
mitted carefully prepared BRIEF and
as I think, the only brief submitted
for defendants. / think, from late
decision of our supreme court, that
my demurrer must be sustained and If
it is shall certainly claim the whole
of what credit there may be in il. /
make this last statement from no con-
ceit whatever, but simply because 9TH
ers appear to be evidently trying to
rob me of that small fruit of my labor
As to the first case, the one now
pending, about eight months ago l
read the petition filed in that case and
the answer filed for the city of Baxter
Springs ct. al. and Immediately urged
that new answer should be filed set
ting up the special defenses so mu:h
talked of and 80 much depended upon
for the reason that under the answer
filed these special matters of defense
were and are shut out and cannot be
proved; after became city attorney l
urged upon our city council repeated
ly that if they intended to fight that
case they should have new answer
filed, but the city council have declined
to take any action in the matter; l
have urged the council 10 try to COM
promise and peacably adjust that and
all our troubles. The answer of one
of them and the attitude Of all but
DIR. Gregg and the mayor was and is:
ut won't be treating Mr.. HorAOr
right to take that out of his hands
now" The "taking it out of his
hands" 1 never said word about, but
1 submit that the members of the city
council of this city have higher duty
than to consult the feelings of any one
or dozen men-that their first duty is
TO the city.
Action should be taken in this mat
ter-it is of vital Importance to us. A
new answer should be filed and a
proper fight made, or a disclaimer of
all liability in the matter, or fair,
peaceable and speedy settlement DO
made. What is going to be done?
SAMUEL. II. SMITH.