The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1898-11-21

The Gibbons contempt of court case
has assumed another new phase. The
contempt feature has been eradicated.
temporarily at least, and the question
now before court Is as to whether or
not the questions asked by Mr.. Hol-
gate ut the contest hearing are regular.
When the rule on Mr.. Gibbons TO
show cause why he should not he
committed for contempt came w ho-
fore the three judges Saturday, |. II.
Burns, Mr.. Gibbons attorney, raised
the objection that his client was call
ed upon to face a criminal charge
without any facts being set forth by
which he might make answer
The court, while not admitting the
correctness of MIR. Burns position, di-
reCted that arguments proceed on the
original question as to whether or not
the witness should answer the alleged
irregular and improper questions. Mr.
Burns was not ready to proceed with
a hearing on this phase Of the case
ana the matter went over
Ii. & S. CO. APPEAL.
Testimony was taken before Judge
Edwards Saturday in the matter of
the appeal or the Lackawanna Iron
aud Steel company from the triennial
assessment.
Attorney Joseph O'Brion, on behalf
Of the company, showed that the sew
erai pieces of the Company's property,
actually valued at 100000, which IN
1897 was assessed at $1,000 were by tn"
last assessment giVoE "a valuation of
S9t17O.
The pump house property, IN acre
in extent. situated in the Eighth ward,
was assessed at g.. 900 in 1897, and $500
| in 1895. Eleven acres on South WASH
ington avenue containing machine
shops was assessed at $20000 III 1897
and this year it was given 4 valuation
of $34, 260. The North works property.
which IN 1897 Was asSeG at $l3, 900, is
| assessed this year at $G3.6"O. Another
eleven acre plot which in 1897 was
assessed &4,oCQ is now assessed $17370.
city Solicitor NJ. n. McGinlry and
| Comfy Solicitor II. 4. KNAPP appeared
| in defense Of the assessment.
Through Attorney John +. SCragE
| Mrs. Emma j.. Brink on Saturday ia
| StitUted ejectment proceedings against
| Mary Ann Rogers and Mary Ida RoE
ors to secure possession of L lot of land
| and n two story frame dwelling house
! situated on DrinkCr street. DunmOrc.
| in the case of Thomas Il. Gordon
against the city of Scranton. Referee
| Charles T.. Diver flied an award of 500
| in favor of the plaintiff. The dam
ages complained Of Hrsulted to The
plaintiff property in Sand Banks from
ami overflow of the Fourth district
! main sewer.
On the grounds of desertiOn Ida NJ
| Shlnclv was granted n divorce from
George NJ. Shanlev. who was former.
| ly a printer in this city.
FOR A NEW TRIAL.
A rule for a new trial was granted
in the case Of Hill ana Connell against
| the ReYford company. The main rea.
son assigned was that the verdict fol
| the defendant was against the weight
| of the evidence.
The case Of Mary Barrett agains
the city of Scranton was referred t.
Attorney John j. Murphy
\ rule was granted to show cause
why the sheriff'a sale of the Bontl
patent should not be set aside. Tn,
ru'e was petitioned for by George G.
| Winans and others.
| In the case of Hummel agains
| Hoffecker. Judge Archibald handed
down an opinion reversing iudgmen
! au6 sending the case to trial again,