Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1895-10-12
IN THE SUPREME COURT.
Five Important Opinions Handed
Down and Several Cases Argued
and Submitted.
Mr.. RODEY EXPLAINS HIS RETREAT.
McCreight Appears at the Bar of Court
in Contempt Proceedings-Mr.
Hughes Flies Westward-At-
tachment for PageB. Otero.

day afternoon, the case entitled the Union
Trust Company, of New York, appellee,
vs.. A., I. & 8. F. Railroad Company, Pos
tai Telegraph company, intervenor, ap-
pellant, was argued and submitted. Mr..
7. B. Catron represented the appellee and
Mr.. W. B. Childers the appellant.
The court resumed work this morning
at $3.50 with full bench present.
Opinions were handed down IN the fol-
lowing cases:
John G. Albright OF al, appellees, vs..
Texas, Santa Fe & Northern Railroad
company ct al, appellants. The decree
of the lower court was affirmed; opinion
by Justice Collier, Justice Hamilton con-
curing; Justice Laughlin dissented. ,;
Abraham D. Coon, appellee, vs.. Bosque
Bonita Land & Cattle com pany ct AL, ap-
pellants. The decree of the lower court
was modified and affirmed; opinion by
Justice Laughlin, Chief Justice Smith
and Justice Bantz concurring; Justice
Collier dissented.
The Territory of New Mexico VS.. Su-
sano Ortiz, appellant. The judgment of
the lower court was reversed and the case
remanded for new trial; opinion by
Justice Bantz, Justices Collier and Hamil-
ton concurring; Chief Justice Smith dis
sented.
The Territory of New Mexico vs.. Maxi
miano Griego, appellant. The judgment
of the lower court was reversed and the
case remanded for new trial; opinion by
Justice Bantz, Justice Collier concurring;
Justice Laughlin dissented.
Union Trust Company, of New York,
appellant, vs.. A., 4. & s. F. Railroad COM
pany, James H. Madden, intervenor, APP
pellee. The judgment of the lower court
was affirmed; opinion by Justice Laugh
lin, Chief Justice Smith and Justice Ham
ilton concurring.
The case of NJ. W. Stanton, appellant,
vs.. I. B. Catron, appellee, was argued
and submitted this forenoon. Mr.. Neill
B. Field represented the appellee and Mr..
A. B. McMillen the appellant.
A recess was then taken until 1:30 p. m.
| ATTACHMENT FOR PAGE B. OTERo.
At the incoming of court this afternoon,
Solicitor General Victory, chairman of
the committee appointed to prosecute
certain charges against 7. B. Catron and
Charles A. Spiess, presented written
communication reciting that Page B.
Otero, at the city Of Trinidad, Colo, had
attempted by improper and undue in
t1uences to prevent Ike NOVEL; and Nellie
Apodaca from obeying the subpenas of
the court to appear as witnesses in said
hearing concerning Catron & Spiess, and
asking that an attachment for contempt
be ordered for said Page B. Otero.
The clerk was ordered to issue an at
tachment for Otero returnable forth
with.
MR.. RODY EXPLAINS.
The following explanatory letter was
filed with the clerk of the supreme court
this afternoon:
LAW OFFICE OF BERNARD S. RoDEY.
Albuquerque, N. M, Oct. II, 1895. !
In re T. B. Catron and Charles A. Spiess.
Messrs. j. P. Victory, W. B. Childers
and A. A. Jones, members OF committee,
Santa Fe, N. M.
Gentlemen: Your telegram received
this morning, and answered it at once
that l did not and do not concur in the
filing of petition in the Citizen matter.
l did not word the dispatch to suit me, so
l write this to supplement the same. l
do not wish to be understood as in any
manner countenanclng such action as the
publication of an article like the one pub
lished in the Citizen, because in the first
place know that it is not true, and it is a
gross act of disrespect to the court, but l
am not entirely satisfied that it is our
duty as committee to call the courts
attention to it. 1t may be the courts own
affair to do SO; and then again it may be
that under the act of congress the publ
cation is not contempt in facle curl a,
and that the remedy is by indictment of
the culprit. In view of the peculiar po-
sition of our committee, being automa-
ton prosecutors without any directions
to look to the basis Of the charges in the
first instance, and because I am inher-
emily opposed to instituting contempt
proceedings unless it is unquestionably
my duty to do so, must respectfully de-
cline to join in tho petition referred to,
especially as the court knows of itself,
and has the power to order action taken,
even by US, If it chooses. will try and
come up Monday to attend to the case in
chief in obedience to the order of the
court. Very truly yours,
BERNARD s. RoDEY.
MR.. M'oRE1aHT APPEARED.
Deputy U. =. Marshal Loomis there
upon informed the court that he had been
unable to serve the attachment issued for
the body of Thomas Hughes, editor of
the Albuquerque Citizen, as Mr.. Hughes
was not within his Jurisdiction, but that
he had secured w. T. McCreight, bust
ness manager of said newspaper, who
was then in the court room. 3
Mr.. McCreight was then presented at
the bar of the court and ordered immedi-
ately to answer the charges preferred
against him.
Gen. Bartlett, counsel for Mr.. Nc
Creight, asked what length of time would
be granted to his client to prepare his
answer.
After few moments of consultation,
the court granted Mr.. McOreight until
$50, on Monday morning, to make an
= L