Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-03-12
AT CROSS PURPOSES.

One Proposes to Show Good and fhe Other
Bad Faith-P. & Mt. o. 1. p. Co. Versus
p. /. p. Co.-Resu umpiion of the Hear
ing In the Equity Suit.
The hearing in the equity suit of the
Pittsburg and Mt. Oliver Inclined Plane
Company versus the Pittsburg Inclined
Plane Company was resumed before the
Master, d. f. Patterson, ESQ.,, yesterday,
opening by the cross-examinstion of Civil
Engineer Won Wagner by Mr.. Lewis, at
torney for the defendant. After many ex-
plantations in addition, subtraction, multi
plication. division, differentiation. inclination,
variation and so on to distraction. Mr.. Lewis
met with an obstruction, and had Mr.. Won
Wagner set aside until he could produce a
map.
Mr.. C. J. Schultz was next cross-examined.
He said he had employed Won Wagner to make
the survey by the authority of the members of
the Pittsburg and Mt. Oliver Inclined Plane
Company, in the latter part of October, 1883,
given verbally by a majority of the company.
The idea had been originated by witness while
standing on Washington avenue and looking
down. Plaintiffs appear to attach much i'm
portance to the particular conjunction of
events about this time. 1t was not an acci-
dental meeting, as witness knew the members
wonld be there. Witness was not positive that
there had been a meeting of the corporators
previously.
At this point Mr.. Lewis put in an objection
to the whole of Mr.. Schultzs testimony as in
competent and irrelevant. being secondary and
he unauthorized to engage an engineer to make
the survey.
Mr. Hampton then took Mr.. Schultz in hand
and he said he had never heard of the defend
ant company or any other operating there up
to that time, and that the defendant company
did not get its charter until several months
after the Pittsburg and Mt Oliver Incline
Plane Company had gotten the survey made.
Jacob Thes Oh not sounded). the man who
drove the stakes for Won Wagner, was sworn.
Mr.. Lewis also objected to his testimony sec
ondary, holding that Schultz had not been au-
thorlzed to have the survey made, or at least
that such authorization was not shown. The
master overruled the objection.
Joseph Keeling, Jr., deposed that application
for charter had been made in March. 1SSS,
and it was gotten in June, and witness put the
document into his safe and forgot it, and when
Schultz got home from Europe he called wit
ness attention to the OMISSION, and took the
charter and had it recorded. Then at meet
ing of majority of the corporators in October
Schultz was authorized to get a survey made.
Witness Saw the pins. but did not see the sur
vey made. Witness and his father had made
plaintiffs tender of right of way through
their property for $4,000.
On cross-eXamination witness said the option
had been gwen in the latter part of February,
1889. given verbally. Witness knew Mr..
Schultzs authority was vide enough and deep
enough to contract.
Jacob H. Miller, Esq, sits behind Mr..
Hampton, and uses cOrkscrew occasionally
when something particular is wanted from a
witness, and each is armed with legal ex-
tinguisher to quench him if he go too far. Mr..
Lewis refreshes himself at intervals by applica-
uon to Secretary GRIMES of the defendant
company. The object of the plaintiffs appears
to be to show that their intentions and survey
were bona fide while the opposition hold that
the preliminaries of the plaintiffs were merely
for the purpose of shutting out competition.