Los Angeles herald., 1890-06-04
In the Circuit Court of the United
States, Ninth Circuit, Southern
District of California.

WATERLOO MINING COMPANY "a COR
W porationl, Complainant, VS.. Southern Pa
and Pacific Railway Company "a corporationl,
Purdy Relyea, w. S Porter, John W; Pearson, E.
Hn5K BeR W3 wa hnd 3Ghn
ard Roe, Defendants-In Equity.
Order directing absent defendants to appear
1t appearing to the the satisfaction of the court
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 will voluntarily
appear thereto; and it further appearing that
this suit is brought to enforce claim to and to
remove a 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 above-entltled bill;
1t is therefore ordered and directed that the
following named defendants, who absent
from, are not inhabitants of, and cannot be
viz, Southern Pacific Railroad Company, which
is a corporation, and a 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, a corporation duly organ
ized and existing, with the right to sue and be
sued, plead and be impleaded, 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 hav-
ing its 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;
Purdy Relyea, whom the complainant is in
formed and believes is a 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 subject of the Queen of Great Britain
| an alien, and a silent of Melbourne, Aus
tralia; John w. Pearson, a citizen of the State
| of California. and resident of the city of Oak
land, in the county of Alameda, in said State;
and Z. NJ. Railton, whom the complainant is
| informed believes citizen of
and resident of said city of Oakland. in said
State of California, and each of them do appear
second day of June, 1890, 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
plaint each certified by the solicitor of COM
| plainant to be a 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
any absent defendant or defendants upon whom
J personal service thereof is not practicable, a
copy of this 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 tthan once week, for six consecutive
| it 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
| court may allow, and upon proof of said serv
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
ap8-tu9t