Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1895-10-26
RAILWAYS IN COURT
L0a: Ct8plny ald u. 7. L.Isl.IG1
Again DlsCasn..
uosonoLbrHs SOW nsEaye7r.
The Case I, s,cos ng Nt,ll Iore tom.
pli'Atc! a, Il guc. Oa-Otset
legal it.m..

western linz. IN IT, u liop Pao,il,
system hal auotIer inuinys oicts
Judge Mofrl,t .oday. The Uu.pn
Pacind interlst vas rapto,'"'rg hy
AfIomus II. Holm1s ami X. q. Hall,
IN addition 10 locd counsel, z. L..
Williams and l. ursrd YJd'g, Joan
A. Mafhhall. Of Bennett, Marsnaii "a
Bradley, a,p,afe! iof Il : plainus
Judge Jonn A. hsrLhAli, u Jnsel
for the American Losn GnJ trust coId-
~ y, In the proc. ildgs Lr : tore.
CLOSURE Of the plsiutn's mort age IN
tie Oregon 5lort Lius azi u 80 n
Northern ia,lwhy's lines Ia U,au, uisDs
n M tiOn Tor . decree Of foreclosure on
tho tlssdirgs. He said tho compliant
wa. verified, I'D tho an,w q ia not
verified. arJ undt' tue U.ah stntaio
tue plsintiii was entitled to the decree
asked. Beyond that, NJ. Marshall
sad the unvorih,d answer waa
not a donisl OF the plaintiff. aliega.
ions. Judge Marshal then reviewed
the contents OF the com plAint aud an.
swVr, aud argued thereon IN support
of hi- motion, claiming lie was legally
tntl 10 beyond question, 10 the lore
60 ute ueefVe asked for. Similar de-
cttts had been granted Ia Oregon,
W. oming aud lIaho. Nc. March
quutei from remarks OF Senator Thurs
IOn, counsel tor the UgiOn Pacific, in
when lie said he knew of nothing In
the way OF granting the fOreclo,ure
asked and to whinh ne imagined they
wet, entitled. Toe Gully denial Of the
Defendant was that on April l, 1894,
coupons on the consolidated bonus
" 10 presented aud payment refused.
| Me-. Marsball called sttenti0n TO the
TACT that the denial vas limited TO tho
Oue day named, aud dId not deny
mat Presentation anu refusal took
place on subsequent uate. The
plaintin asked TO iOreclose hisiequity VI
redemption from nrst mortgage, hs
plsintiii's was u second, mortgage.
MI. IL. ). Hail replied Tor tbs Oregon
Short Lane, anu eApre,sed surprise
that the question Of verincation OF tho
snswer should be raised nj the present
time. Ho thought n corporation never
answered unuor oath. He sail tho
decree OF foreclosure In wyomi x was
not worth tho powder u bow II up
Win; II was not cont, sted. The de-
cree In Ofes on had been under difief-
ent answer 10 that In the case here.
Mr. Hail sail he saw no use ~ quoting
Judge Tburton's remarks here. Mir.
Hall utgeu tbat the answer did make
specific denials OF the allegations
stated In the complaint. anu read In
support OF his assertion IN this respect.
He insisted that the date OF the pre-
ssntation OF coupons was a matter Of
allegatou In the complaint, aud was n
,ubiect Of specific dental. Hs uavetsoi
tue ground NJ considerable length, anu
insisted that the plaintiff had no legal
claim TO foreclosure NJ tho present
II ~ OF the case.
1wi,e dunng the arguments, Judge
Marshall askel Of Mt. Hail tue nam Q
Of the Judge In Wyoming who hal
gtAntei the decree Of force Osutt, but
sscl time Air. Hail refused TO snswsr
the qd' silou.
Mr. Il. l.. Williams mate brief ar.
gumoni, taking 40 position that ,he
complaint aud answer we're Ia usual
form, and thHt the failure TO ve'fy
tue answer was not u m t,ufiAl c etner.
in tho discussion here. he AlsO ar
gued That tac mo'iOu maze uy piaiu-
II was not allowable at this time.
Judge ManHbpil teas-.uoI his
claim that tn. Territorial and u't ths
F-i vi practice t.evaiitd In tIis cbsc.
aud he thought the suggestion to tue
c0utiBfy was original, ~ ioast, with
NJ. Aall. The pft 'tIcr, he hlugnt,
.ns wholly diiirfenI ffom tne que-ii n
OF ia i-dic'ion. lie ais READ the 'tsrs
Of sidg S-nbOtn, OF Wycmin,, 20
Judge R-'uef, VINO, II was abcei,'incG,
rante4 the Oecre' VI e 'ec.osuf.. Mt.
MafsDAl pOis'-d out tnas tho
denial OF tho presentation OF tic
coupons on Am /, 1894, wa a
aIiOble, the TACT be'.s thBt tnat dstc
wac SUNDAY, and the csupops ~ers
| April End. Tho answer OF IL, defends
ants, he olAimsd was a sham, hni was
tniiiEg wish .ss court.
Mt. Hal was Y Yea tsn days TO pre-
! sent n lL Of authorities 10 the cOdr,,
. with Tsmatss Iefe0
Tar. Artsmus II. Holmes said he APP
l. reared .sr two trustees, Mr. Bamn
anu Mr.. Ames, representing the Uiah
6 Sout. Urn anu Juan bouth'.n extern
2, sion, aud asked leave W in eTvoro,
{ aul TO he made parties In this suit, -
Y the request Of the bUndhOldcrs' COM
7 mi,lee. MIR. Holmes Ga ughg that II
Y tho decree asked was grated,
! tho ntsrests OF the bOnunOlt-
y ere would be preiudlced. He
/ made al extended Argument In
. support VI his request, tayiug tue
property should DO srli aHd ths monsy
y loo applied TO iiquld.ting tho claims
o again,t Il.
= During Mr. Holmes'1 argument iso
4 court took thJ Ioon Ievsns, anu this
, afternoon the Argument wor' com
u pleitd.
|. Mr.. lie Grand Yo, 1g also appeared
U for tho tTuslees wHo desired Ia intsr-
yeHe. rhe application 10 i-'erveue
:, was opposed ny Sir. Marshall. At the
4. conclusion OF the arguments, Juugo
h Merritt took tho two motloLs under sL-
]. ylfemeut.
e Othur business before Judge Merritt
G we're as follow;
Il Charles Mostyn owen. formerly u
,, England, but now Oi Salt Lake, was
II admitted TO Citiseuship.
Tue suit OF Chriotianeon W Gins
: tlanspn was sol for hearing on NJ. 2.
Remington, johnson a %. v.J siGh
\. Rainuti; motion u strike cat sns' ar
b and croes oomplai { sot Tor Nov. 2.
=, James Nj. Dart VS. A. y. Go RisQlui;
| default OF defendant entered.