Los Angeles herald., 1890-04-22
LEGAL.
In the Circuit Court of the United
States, Ninth Circuit, Southern
District of California.

WATERLOO MINING COMPANY CA COR
w porati0n), Complainant, VS.. Southern Pa
and Pacific Railway Company Ia corporationl,
Purdy Relyea, W. S. Porter, John W. Pearson, E.
NJ Raiton, Henry Black, William White, John
Williams, Peter Pink, Charles Green and Rich
ard Roe, Defendants.-In Equity
Order directing absent defendants to appear.
1t appearing to the satisfaction OF the court
from the verified bill of complainant that the
defendants in the abOve-entitled suit are none
OF them inhabitants of the southern district OF
California, or are to be found within said dis
/ trict, and that none of them wall voluntarily
appear thereto; and it further appearing that
this suit is brought 30 enforce claim to ard to
remove cloud upon the title to real estate and
cloud upon the title to mining claims Within
said southern district of California, consisting
of the land and the mining claims of the com
plainant in the abovs-entitled bill;
1t is therefore ordered and direCted that the
following named defendants, who are absent
from, are not inhabitants of, andt cannot be
found in, said southern district of California,
viz, Southern Pacific Railroad Company, which
is a corporation, and citizen OF the State of
California, having its office and principal place
of business in the city and county OF San Fran
cisco, State of California; Atlantic and Pacific
Railroad Company, corporation duly organ
lied and existing, WI tn the right to sac and be
sued, plead and be ilnpleaded, defend and be
defended, in all courts of law and equity in
the United States, under and by virtue of the
laws of the United States of America by an act
OF Congress approved July 27, 1866, and hay
ing It's office and principal place of business in
and also having an Office for the
transaction of its business in the city and
county of San Francisco, State of California;
Pur(9y Relyea, whom the complainant is in
formed and believes is citizen of the State of
California, and resident of the city and county
of San Francisco, in said State; W. S. Porter,
whom the complainant is informed and be-
lieves is "A subject of the Queen of Great Britain,
an alien, and resident OF Melbourne, Aus
tralia; John w. Pearson, citizen of the State
OF California, and resident of the city of Oak
land in the county of Alameda, in said State;
and E. NJ. Railton, whom the complainant is
informed and believes is citizen of California,
and resident of said city of Oakland, in said
State of California, and each of them do appear,
plead, answer, Or demur, in said suit, by the
second day of June $780, and that this order
be served on each of said defendants if practi-
cable, wherever found, by delivering a copy
thereof, together with a copy of the bill of COM
plalnt, each certified by the solicitor Of COM
plainant to be q correct copy, at least twenty
days before said second day of June, 1890, such
service to- be made by such persons as the
solicitor of complainant may choose, and to be
proved by the affidavit Of.the person serving the
same, and that for service of this order upon
any absent defendant or defendants upon whom
personal service thereof is not practicable, a
copy ofthis order, certified to be correct by the
solicitor of complainant; be published in the
Los Angeles HERALD, a daily newspaper pub
lished at Los Angeles, in the State of California,
not less than once week, for six consecutive
weeks, before the second day of June, 1890 and
1t is further ordered that in case any of such
absent defendants shall not appear, plead,
answer, or demur, within the time limited by
this order, or within such further time as this
COult uiioN, anu upon proof OI Sdlu SerN-
ice and of publication of this order, and of per-
formance of the directions herein contained,
this court will entertain jurisdiction of said
suit, and will proceed to the hearing and
adjudication thereof in the same manner as if
each of said absent defendants had been served
with process within the southern district of
California, but said adjudication will, as re-
CARDS said absent defendant or defendants who
may not appear in said suit, affect only the
property and rights, which are the subject OF
said suit, which are under the jurisdiction OF
this court. ROSS, Dist. Judge.
Dated March 81, 1890.
hereby certify the foregoing order directing
absent defendants to appear to be correct copy
of the original. A. H. RICKETTS,,
Solicitor and Counsel for Complainant
apS-tu9t