The Indianapolis journal., 1897-04-16
City Attorney Raises Good Point as
to SOundness Of Especial Legis-
Iation" in This Case.
AN IMMEDIATE INJUNCTION
DEMANDED DURING THE DAY But
IGNORED BY THE COURT.
Judge ShowaIter Gives the street.
ing an Very Pertinent Question.

The argument upon the constitutionality
OF the 3-cent-fare law before Judge Showal-
ter. in the Federal Court yesterday lasted
all day and was made before a crowded
courtroom The Central Trust Company,
of New York asking an injunction
behalf Of the bondholders TO Restrain the
company. the city and the prosecuting at
torney from putting the law into effect.
was represented by the regular attorneys
of the company, General Harrison. w H
II. Miller and Ferdinand Winter The COM
pany was represented by its president A
L. Mason, and w. II. Latta- The city was
represented by John W. Kern and City At
torney Curtis, and Prosecutor Wiltsie. an
officer OF the State, was represented by
the attorney general.
The company's attorneys, nominally rep
resenting the trust company, confined their
attention almost exclusively TO the question
OF the validity of the law. They did not
waste much time upon the contention OF
the complaint that the company was going
to comply with the law and thereby weak
EN- the security OF the bonds. nor did they
trouble themselves to make it appear that
the suit was not collusory. on the contra
ry, Mr.. Miller. nominally representing the
trust company. which is seeking TO enjoin
the street-railroad company spoke with the
greatest naivete of "our' contract with the
city and the effort Of the Legislature TO
make this law apply to 'us" alone.
The argument was not finished yester-
day. Speeches were made by Messrs. Mill
err Winter, Ketcham. Curtis and Kern. and
the crowd that had been waiting all day
to hear General Harrison went away disap-
pointed when the court adjourned at
o'clock till 10 o'clock this morning. AT this
time General Harrison will close the argu-
ment.
Judge Showalter sat perfectly silent all
day, making but a single remark, when he
reminded Mr.. Kern that the question OF
reasonableness of the 3-cent fare had not
been raised by the bill. But he came pret-
ty near giving the attorneys upon the COM
panys side of the suit a case of heart dis
ease just at the close of the day and after
he had announced that the court would adj
journ until 10 o'clock this morning.
The court said quietly: There is a ques-
ton in this case that has occurred TO me
as 1 sat here. AS / understand il there
are four parties to the controversy--the
New York corporation, the Citizens Street
railroad Company, the city Of Indianapolis
and the prosecuting attorney. Is not the
interest of the New York corporation and
or the street-car company the same?"
Practically, 1 suppose, they are re-
piled Mr.. Miller, rather breathlessly.
Then, has the court jurisdicton?" again
asked the court.
Il think So" replied Mr.. Miller, still bit
out of breath.
II have not thought it had" interjected
Attorney Generel Ketcham; but that
question did not come up in my conten-
ton"
THE controversy" said the court has
TO be between parties citizens OF different
States. and IL the interests OF the plain
tiffS and one OF the defendants identi-
cal-or am L thinking OF removal statute2"
Mr.. Miller said: THE Citizens Company
has not exactly the same interests as the
plaintiff The New York company is a
creditor, and in that way the question
arises. as ii did in the Farmers Loan and
Trust Company against Reagan ct al. In
the Texas case"
II thought i would make the suggestion
at this time" said the court. None of you
had referred TO ii, and / don't know that
there Is anything in il; but you may think
it over. and il you have anything to say
on the subject il can be submitted at 10
o'clock tomorrow morning"