Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1893-08-15
THE NATY's FIGHT.

GALVESTON, Tex, Aug 14.-CSpe-
cial)-The application of the Missouri,
Kansas and Texas for perpetual in
junction restraining the International
and Great Northern from interfering
with the running of the trains of the
Missouri, Kansas and Texas over the
Galveston, Houston and Henderson into
Galveston, came up before Judge Stew
art in the state district court this morn
ing. Both sides announced ready.
Judge Stewart said he would
hear the reading If the original petition
anu contract between the Missouri, Kan
sns and Texas aud the Galveston, Hous-
ton and Henderson was read, Attorney
Armstrong. their attorney, read the an
SWcr OF the Galveston, Houston and
Henderson TO the plaintiffs petit,on
wherein is admitted all the allegations Of
the plaintiff US co-lefcndant with the
international and Great Nortfo,n. and
stated that the Galveston. Houston and
Henderson Is ready and willing to Der
form its duty as required by the char
Ter and the laws Of the state
The answer Of the International and
Great Northern to the original petition
ives then read. Mr. Ballinger after read
Ing the same said he would read the en-
tire answer before the argument IL made.
rlsardlng the abatement and dismissal
of the case ON the ground that the Mis-
souri,, Kansas aud Texas Is not a legally
incorporated company and their contract
with the Galveston, Houston and Hcndpr-
son has not been approved by the state
railroad commissioners.
Mr' Hagcrman Of counsel Of the Mis-
souri,, Kansas and Texas rejOined: we
shall insist upon Il full hearing Of the
case altogether"
The second supplemental petition Of the
Missouri. Kansas and Texas and general
denial Of the allegations set forth In the
answer of thn International and Great
Northern TO the original petition was then
read.
Mr.. Lovett Of counsel for the Missouri,
Kansas and Texas stated that as to the
question of the legality of the iucurpOra-
ton of the Missouri, Kansas and Texas,
they did not propose 10 go into the argu-
ment of the cuse by piecemenl, but rs an
entirety.
Mr.. Pierce of the International and
Great Northern rcjoined by Stating that
there were many points Of law on the
threshold Of the case that could be de.
cided, as well MS several points regard
ing the abatement of the injunction.
without arguing the entire case.
This was combated by Mr. Hagcrman,
who held that the whole question 4 the
case was the validity OF the lease of the
International aud Great Northern of the
Galveston, Houston and Henderson.
Mr.. Ballinger objected and held that
the International and Great Northern
was entitled by the statutes to argument
on and decision of the different points
of law as the case proceeds, as they Ind
asked for an abatement, AMI held they
were entitled 10 decision without 1ues-
ton, as they had made Il sworn denial
Of the validity Of the Missouri Kansas
ana Texas contract on account Of their
not being legally Incorporated company.
This view of the case was sustained by
Mr.. Duncan who stated that The Mis-.
souri,. Kansas and Texas seemed 10 think
that the International aud Great North
ern ease was the only question Al IS
sue.
The court held that 1t would consume
as much time 10 argue and settle these
various questions Of law as II would
the whole case. However, he had no
objections to hearing the argument by
piecemeal. Hence the entire day was
consumed in arguing the various points
of law involved by opposing counsel
aud the ease viii undoubtedly consume
the entire week
For that ssout ~ sce,sts s.a,t,.