The Durham daily globe. (Durham, N.C.) 1889-1894, 1893-08-14
THE SORRY MULE
The Judge Says That He Must Plod
Along.
A Full Text Of What Judge Brown
round i'm Ii.
A CHANCE NOW FOR MUCH DELAY
Anyhow the Mule Will Do His Sorry
Trips Till Judge Brown Finds
That He Should Not.

Anyhow the Mule VIII Do His Sorr
Trips Till Judge Brown Finds
That He Should Not.
This cause came on to be heard by N
at chambers at Hillsboro, N. c., on Au
gust 8, upon the return day fixed in tn
restraining order, Messrs Fuller & Fulle
appearing for plaintiff. and Messrs. J. S
Manning and Boone & Parker for the de
PENDANT. The first point earnestly in
sisted upon by the defendant is that the
Durham Consolidated Land and Improve
ment company acquired no title to the
property franchise and street railway OF
its company, plaintiffs. 1t is true that
there must be authority shown for the
officers of a corporation to confess a
judgment. Such authority has been
clearly shown in the case. While it is
better and safer that this authority should
appear in the judgment roll, | don't con.
strue the cases cited as deciding that,
where such authority in fact actually ex-
listed at the time Of the confession of
judgment, the absence of copies of the
minutes Of the corporation from the judg-
ment roll avoids absolutely and renders
worthless the judgment. 1t is clear that
the Durham Consolidated Land and I'M
prOVement company have a colorado title
to the property, a deed from the sheriff,
and that it has been in actual possession
since 1889, and that such possession has
been recognized by the defendant. This
is sufficient title to ask the protection of
the court to prevent a destruction of the
property if there be no other reason why
that protection be withheld.
The second contention of the defen
dant is that the railway is a nuisance in
its present condition. 1t appears clearly
enough to me that this railway is not
operated in accordance with the purposes
for which its charter was granted and
That 1t Is of no value to the citizens of
Durham in its present condition, but as
to whether it constitutes an actual nuis-
ance so as to warrant its destruction by
defendant is a matter involved in much
doubt as shown by the many conflicting
afiidaVits filed in the cause. It is clear
that the alleged forfeiture of the fran
chise for nOn-use and a failure to per-
form the duties assumed by it can only
be determined in an action brought bv
the sovereign, the state, through it's at
torney-general. think the question of
nuisance must be determined indepen
dent of and apart from this question. The
findings Of the defendant are not conclu
stye and the afiidavits leave it hard to de-
whether the nuisances com.
planned of are OcCasioned by the condi
ton of railway or by the condition of the
street.
If there were no other questions in
should continue the Injunction
20 the final hearing. !;
1t appears that the railway is not util
.zed and not operated but little at this
lime, and it is admitted that the defendant
5 entirely solvent. 1t is evident that the ]
public would not suffer by tearing up the
rack and the operation of no public en-
erprise would be suspended. The plain {
if could recover full damages if a tress
'aSs is committed or a wrong done it by
he defendant.
AS this question was not argued before
ne or but slightly touched on, | will take 4
he matter under advisement and the in.
heretofore ordered is continued
the further order Of the court. !
Counse are requested to agree upon q C
.ay for further argument, or if requested n
y either, will fix a day. |
(Signed), G II. BRowy
Pure and Wholesome Quality 3
'ommendS to public approval the Cali.
Ornia LIQUID laxative remedy SvruD Of