The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1894-10-07
TAX CASE UNDER AMUSEMENT.
Judge Reinhard Will Render n Deci-
sion Within Two Weeks.

sACA
Judge Reinhard heard the concluding ar
gument in the Union railway tax case yes
terday evening. He announced that he
would give an opinion in the case within
the next two weeks. Attorney Pickens
opened the argument for the railroad in
the morning. He was followed by Leon
Bailey for the State. who at noon gave
way TO w. a. Ketcham, his cocounseI. A.
c. Harris, who has conducted the exam
ination Of witnesses through the case, had
the concluding speech. The States at
torneys. maintaining their position, insisted
that the tax commissioners had been guilty
OF no fraud in assessing the railroads; that
they were sworn officers OF the law, whose
duty It was to examine the witnesses as to
the value of the property, and ii was pre-
sumed that they had done so. They con-
tended that even IL the assessment was ex-
cessive there was not sufficient reason for
reversing the judgment.
Attorney Harris, in making his argument,
addressed himself much of the time to the
States attorneys. In one instance he in
dulged In the following:
II ask. did the gentlemen on the other
side or this case ever, in all their lives, see
such a spectacle In the great State Of In
erty Of a citizen against his will for tax
alton. The people OF the State are told
that no matter how many lawyers and wit
nesses may come, representing a road, sup
ported by the truth OF honest men. the
State Board OF Tax Commissioners will
pay no attention TO such estimony but
VIII assess such property as IL pleases. Can
anybody stand up and say that these men
acted impartially? I know the gravity of
the charges made against this board. saw
that the proof IN this case in 1881 estab-
lished that this property was worth 81, OOO.-
600, and / say that the conduct of the
board characterLZes the act. This is not a
common law court 1t is a court OF con-
science, ruled by the broad rule of Justice.
Shall this $4,000 a year be taken from this
conscience says that right shall be done,
though the heavens fall"
Mr.. Harris held that the Union railway
and station were vital necessities to the
public; that they were as important 10 the
city OF Indianapolis as Washington street.
He contended that the contract entered into
between the railroad companies years ago
was legalizd by the legislature and could
not be broken The Union railway, to his
mind, was a part Of the State interests. II
could not be sold and could not be put to
any other use than TO serve the public as
II now does He showed that IL was a prom
erty that cost but 100000: a properly
without income and without selling value.
because IL could not be disposed OF, its con-
tract being a part Of the common law. In
concluding his argument Mr.. Harris said:
= am reminded OF the cry OF the novice
at the bar, that II you find so and so Won
VIII convict somebody OF perjury. i had
thought that my friend. who is a candidafe
for the most honorable Office in orr nro-
vas tOO OtQ ana
too wise 10 make such an appeal as that
IL Is never made except as the last resort
OI q nan neelng TO escape what he feels
The state asks judgment against the
Union and Belt railway for S242. 900. the
amount OF taxes which have accrued since
the year 1891
indictments Returned.
The following indictments have been re-
turned by the grand Jury:
Mack Davidson and Robert Walters
petit larceny tive cases.; Mack Davidson
and Robert Walters, grand larceny; Fred
srick Braun e al, grand larceny; William
Davis. petit larceny; Glen Lenore. assault
and battery with intent 10 rape: George
Sonners. petit larceny; John Bell. petit
larceny; Charles Smith. grand larceny.
The grand jury recommended the dis
Charge or Carroll RhOaGs, held for burg
larry; Barney Stamm, Elmer Walker and
The following arraignmsnts and pleas
were entered in the Criminal Court yester-
cases.. not guilty; Robert Waters, petit
larceny, not guilty; Fred Braun, grand
larceny, not guilty; Glenn Lenore. assault
and battery with intent to rape. not guilty
William Davis, petit larceny, guilty: Johr
Bl, petit larceny, not guilty; Charles
walters. petit larceny. mot mot guilty. SHt Ge ErsC
Connors, petit larceny. guilty; Mack Da.
wilson. grand larceny. not guilty; Robert
Walters, grand larceny, not guilty.
Drove Her from Home.
Cora NJ. Stelting has sued for divorce
from William II. Stelting. alleging failurs
TO provide and cruelty as causes for the
separation. They were married In Decem.
Der. ISss. and separated on Friday OF last
week. In her complaint she AYERS that hel
husband frequently struck her and locked
her In a room at their home. No. 1s Locke
street. The elimination OF the crueltie.
charged against the husband came las
Friday. when he drove her from the homi
on Locke street. She alleges that both tn,
home and personal property ia il belong
10 her. but that her husband has threat
ened 10 do her bodily harm If she ATTEMPT,
TO return TO II One OF their children 4
In the custody OF the plaintiff, while tn
other Is In the custody OF the husband
Ara Sfeltine asks that she De granite,