Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1891-04-11
LOOKING FOR LIGHT.
Fayette People With Both Eyes on
the State Supreme Court.
LOCAL ATTORNEYS INTERESTED.
Peculiar State Of Affairs in a Suit Against
Fuel Company.
AN INJUNCTION THAT WAS REsCINDED

The Fayette Fuel Gas Company will
have another shy at the Supreme Court
to-day-this time on a most unique phase OF
the mandamus question. An epltomlzed
statement of a lengthy case history is simply
that Louis 2. Whiteman had manu-
factory at Uniontown which the COM
pauv supplied with fuel gas. On
October %, 1890, the gas company
shut off the supply from Mr.. Whiteman's S
works That gentleman employed eN-J Judge
Campampbell, and sailed into court with a
bill asking that an ini JUNCTION issue-for the
usual purpose The company, through its
President, Larry Miner, straightway pro-
cured the talent of Frank p Ians, OF the
Plttsburg bar, and made fight
Judge James Inghram refused to make
the decree. Mr.. Campbell then raised his
voice in the Supreme Court here, last fall
and ali Fayette county stood on the tiptoe
of excitement That court directed the
lower court to go back on itself and issue a
preliminary injunction on the company re-
straining it from stopping the gas supply,
provided Mr.. Whiteman furnish the COM
panv with bond for So, precautionary
A1dLLlSL ALE USUAL llIODdblS lOSSSS'
Part of the Injunction Rescinded.
This Judge Inghram did, at the same
time extending the decree 10 the Sheriff of
the county, that official having seized the
gas company's property and so on on an
execution issued by A. W. Mellon, a judg-
ment debtor of the concern, who had caused
the execution TO be issued. Subsequently
Judge Inghram became convinced that as
the PRAYER tor the injunction had not
originally included either the Sheriff or
Mr.. Mellon as defendants, and as the in
junction, as extended TO the Sheriff, was
wrong on q bameless third party, rescinded
that part Of the injunction relating
to the Sheriff, and allowed to stand
only that part of the decree covering the
gas company But that concern had been
absorbed by the judgment debtor, Mellon,
and Mr.. Iams was in the lead.
Then Judge Campbell made another
move; this time petitionlng the Common
Pleas CourI to bring a. W. Mellon and the
gas company people, among whom was
Judge Ewing, before the bar, to show cause
why they all should not be at
rached for contempt of court in not
having oLeyed the injunction. But
Judge Ingnram, for the same reasons already
stated refused to grant the rule-not believ-
iuE that the Court had been in any way
offended or affronted.
Taken to the Supreme Court.
NJ. Whiteman then, through his attor-
uey, Judge Campbell, took this refusal to
the supreme Court; also, at the same time,
asking that august body for a writ of man.
dsmus on Judge lnghram to compel
him TO grant the rule to show cause why the
attachments for contempt should not issue.
The lower court made answer, in accord
auce with its reasons for refusal.
That Is how the matter stands for argu-
meut to-day al Philadelphia. Mr.. Iams
contends that Ma Mellon, not being a de-
Iendaut, cannot be controlled by the
injunction on the company, and that
Il there was any contempt it was not
OF the supreme Court, which issued an Or
der TO Judge Inghram, who obeyed it; but
was contempt OF Judge Inghram as the
Court below, and if he did not feel it that
way no higher court could say to him that
he ras wrong. Judge Campbell, however
holds exactly opposite views on both ques-
tiOns.
The attorneys left yesterday for the East.
and in the meantime "Ole Fyat" will be
stretching her ears ior the news from the ris-
ing sun.