Morning journal and courier., 1890-01-14

sent of the Housatonic road. The witness
then occupied some time explaining large
map showing the positions Of the tracks in
the vicinity of the disputed territory. The
of their freight traffic they found 1t neces-
sary to get possession of their property west
of the main tracks of the New York main
line and consequently made the attempt to
relay the cross-over tracks. Witness said in
reply to question relative to the increased
freight traffic that during the last six months
of 1888 the Housatonic road handled 12,787
freight cars, while for the same period in
1889 they handled %, GAG cars. Witness
of the signals used at the switches along the
road. Witness said In reply to a question
regarding the danger of cross-over at the
point where the Housatonio road attempted
to put In that there would be no more dan-
ger than at any other point. He said cross
over at the point would be just as safe un-
der the management of the Housatonic road
as under the management of the New York
He then quoted from the time table of the
Consolidated road whereby the regular pas
senger trains are not entirely gov
erned by the block signal system at
the cross-over in Stamford, Norwalk and
Bridgeport where the switching is done by
using flags at those points. Witness said at
a meeting of the officials of the two roads
held in the Housatonic railroad Office in 1885
the matter of running double tracks was
discussed, also the matter of crossing the
Housatonio tracks above the depot. Mr..
Bsrnum objected to the crossing. Witness
said he suggested that the property of Giles
& CLANCY be purchased 80 that tho Housa
tonic road could run their tracks down to
the depot west of the Consolidated tracks.
1t was agreed that az Mr.. CLANCY worked for
the New York road, and In view of the fact,
that they should purchase the property,
which they did and were to hold in trust for
the Housatonic road, which is tho only
agreement made by the two roads that he
knew of.
At this point several letters between Su-
perintendent Shepard of the Consolidated
road and Henry A. Bishop, superintendent
of the Housatonic road, relative to the settle
raent of the land and track difficulty in
question were read. They referred to ar
ranging meeting for the above purpose.
In one of the letters Mr.. Bishop refers to
the fact that the New Yoak road pays the
Housatonic road $500 for right of way
through the lstter's yard, while the Housa-
tonic road paid the New York road $500
for depot rental Witness said he chose
Sunday night to put in the cross-ever, be-
cause the Consolidated road run no psssen-
ger trains between the hours of $3.50 Sun
day night aud 1903 Monday morning. He
without any hindrance to the Consolidated
road.
Cross-sxamined, he said that at tho meet.
ing Of the officials of the two roads, at which
he was present, there was nothing said by
any representative of the Housatonio road
relative to the sale Of any of their property
to the New York road. and no price was
named for any property. Witness said they
had nothing to sell. Witness said he in
tended to replace the cross-over in about it's
former place and entirely upon their own
ground.
He believed he had perfect right, bat ex-
pected the Consolidated road would object to
the change. They were notified year ago
to get out of our property. We owned the
property and did not consider we were in
duty bound to give them any further notice.
The reason he took the time he did was be-
cause there were no passenger trains running
at that time, 20 that the New York road
would not set up . "howl" that they were
stopping the United States mails and inter-
fering with travel. A recess was here taken
until 2 O'Clock.
BRIDGEPORT, Conn, Jan. 13.-The hearing
of the Housatonic- Consolidated controversy
was resumed this afternoon when the cross
examination of Colonel Stevenson was re-
sumed. The witness said In reply to ques-
ton that tbs time table which he consulted
before he began operations to put In the
turnout on the Sunday night they were
stopped showed the last passenger train pass
ing this city at $3.50 p. m. His attention
showed a train passing at 9.57. He said he
did not intend to begin operations until after
the last train had passed. He did not intend
to use the cross-over track after 1t wss
finished until such time as the Consolidated
road had been notified of the change, and
q notification that their signals must be
obeyed.
Re.direct-He said that in process of the
work ne had no intention of delay
ing any OF the trains of the Consolidated
road.
Andrew ]. Porter was the next witness.
He said he was private secretary of the
Houeatrnic road. He was asked whether any
power was given at any Of the meetings Of
the company to the executive committee to
make any transfers of the property in quest
ion, to which he replied "There was not"
made by the witness in which Mr.. Stevenson
was instructed to take possession of the
in question and relay the cro.s
over tracks attempted when the injunction
was served.
w. 81. Starbuck, president of the Housa-
tonic road, was next called, he said he was
present at the meeting of both roads when q
map was shown of the property. Mr.. Clark
said in looking at the map that they would
like to purchase this property. Nothing was
said about trading property. Mr.. McCaulay
said In reply to Mr.. Clark that they had no
land to sell, they wanted all they had for
their own use.
Cross examined he said the inference
made by Mr.. Clark at that interview was
that the Consolidated road wanted to buy all
the property.
Following, the arguments were made by
William D. Bishop jr., Mr.. DeForest, Profess
sor Baldwin and William Stcddard, after
which ::the court adjourned Judge Hall
reeerving his discision.