The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-09-22

of the Salt Lake City Railroad COM
pany. He never told anyone about il
except Mr.. McCune. who was out of the
city at the time, but who returned a
few days afterwards Mr.. McCune
witness said. censured him severely for
his action. Horn, witness said, wanted
the letter to show his Brigham street
constituents. Mr.. Wells admitted hav-
ing copied the letter in the company S
copying book. The book was offered
in evidence for the purpose of showing
that the letter of Porn's was written
on a different typo & tier to what the
other communications were.
EX- Councilman w. p. O'Meara testi-
fed that at council meeting in 1894
one of the members asked Francis
Armstrong if the company would re-
lease Brigham street, to which Mr..
Armstrong; reply was that it could
not, all the right of way being bonded.
He was positive the latter did not
agree to abandon the street, but heard
him say that they had no intention of
building at that time.
EX-MAYOR ARMSTRONG.
Francis Armstrong said he was may
or of the city when his company was
granted a franchise. The first time any
objections to the extension were raised
was in 1892, when w. Z. Smedley and
y -.
At one meeting of the council COM
mittees. to which witness had been in
vited, he was asked if the company
would abandon East South Temple
street, and the reply he made was he
didn't think so. Witness was then
asked. if such a thing was possible,
would he vote for it, and he replied he
would not. MI Armstrong explained
that he was referring to a committee
of the council of 1894.
Referring to Mr.. Horns visit to the
company's office in 1898, Mr.. Armstrong
said ne only recalled Mr.. Rich being
with Horn. The only persons in the
Office at the time were Secretary Wells
and the other clerks. He did not say
the extension project had been aban-
doned, or that the company would not
build without the consent of the prop
erty owners having first been obtained.
No director of the company. so far as
witness knew, had ever intimated that
any portion of the franchise would or
ought to be given up. He attended
most OF the meetings of the board Of
directors, and would certainly have
heard of it had the question of relin-
gushing ever been mOoted.
In the afternoon the company's sec
rotary, Mr. Wells. was put on the stand
and he identified a letter written by
him to Mr.. Horn of the council while
for the franchise were
pending. In this letter Mr.. Wells stated
that under existing circumstances the
did not intend for years 10
extend its line on Brigham street east
Of E street, holding that it was bad
policy on the part of the company when
such action was Objectionable to the
residents upon whose patronage the
inc had to rely. Tfsehowever, it should
De the wish of the property owners at
some future time to have the car serv-
ce extended to the. reservation, the
matter would be considered. no doubt.
PRESIDENT MCUNE.
President McCune, who was then
called, said Mr.. Wells had no authority
to write such a letter. He was away
IT the time ana first knew about it
Ipon his return, when Mr.. Wells told
aim about it. Mr.. McCune said he CEN
;ured his secretary for assuming such
but did not consider the
natter of very grave Importance, all |
circumstances considered.
Witness said he had frequently talked !
With Horn about the franchise and in /
:identally the Brigham street extension /
anne up, but at no time did he assert /
hat the company had abandoned the /
light to construct a line at some fu- /
ure time. What witness did tell Horn |
vas that the company did not have any
Intention at that time to make the ex-
ension. Horn acted as if he was most /
Interested in squaring himself before |
lis constituents, and wanted the !
company to say something that would
-ppease the residents making the kick.
dr.. McCune denied that he ever told
,ohn the company had abandoned the
disputed street
Nothing material was brought out on
discrimination, despite Judge Dey'S
ttempt to intimate that negotiations
or the franchise were not conducted
properly. Relative to the alleged con-
ersation with Dern a few days ago,
witness denied that he ever used the
anguage attributed to him, to the eff
ect that the company was extending
he line for the purpose of getting even
nth the Rapid Transit company. A
obstruction entirely different from
hat intended was put upon it, he
laimed, but before witness could ex-
lain, the court ruled the testimony on
his point out on the ground of being
Mr.. McCune also stated
hat in all negotiations with members
the council, the officials of the
ompany absolutely refused to abandon
brigham street.
Don't you feel different when ap-
lying Tor franchise or running for
Judge Dey, who was attempting to be
lnny.
No, SIR was the prompt reply; Il
ever go around with my hat in my
and"
HON. r. C. CHAMBERS.
R. c. Chambers said that at none of
le meetings attended by him did the
declare its intention to aban-
on the street in question.
Horn was recalled
e was shown a copy of the letter
ritten by Wells, but declared it was
ot the one he had previously referred
and which had been mislaid. To the
est of his recollection the statement ,
: received as to the company dis
aiming any intention of building ON
lie street was signed by Superintend
It Read. He denied absolutely that
ever went to Secretary Wells with
lie Graft of letter or statement. ask
s Tor his signature.
rms was a fiat contradiction OF Mr.
els testimony on the stand, assert
= thiet. Councilman Horn, or one oc-
'SlOIi, came 10 him with a letter pur-
)rting to assure the Brigham street '
sopie that the line would not be ex- I
noed, ana which statement Mr.. Horn !
anted Tor the purpose of suuaring y
mself with his NRztituents. a
e. Il. Rich co-fobOrated Mr.. Horn on \
e point that the Wells letter was not S
e ore shown by the latter to wit !,
Superintendent Read was mt ~, tho c
and for a brief period, after which @
'th sides rested its case, and argu n
ents will be heard next Saturday o
ening.
SUPREME COURT. S