Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1898-09-21

/ The Council committee. composed of
Mesaru. HON. Evans and Lawson. and
% far NJ he knew no officer u tho
company had ever lntlmnted that the
extension on south Temple street had
leon abandoned.
HE SIGNED THE LETTER
Joseph 3. Wells secretary u the Salt
Lake City Railroad company. testified
that some time IN 1893, while the mat
ter of extension was pcndina. ex-
| Councilman Horn cume g. him with y
prepared typewritten letter. which he
wanted witness 90 alnn. witness said
he told Horn he had no authority.
Horn replied by saying he didn't care
about that and n he could ret witncsss
signature a. secretary there would be
no further trouble about getting the
frnnchlse through. Witness said he
SIGNED ,he ieitct NJ secrctnry Of the
Salt Lake city Railroad company. lie
never told any one about II except Mr..
Nccuno. who was out Of the city NJ
the time. but who returned n few days
afterwards. Mr.. Mccune. witness said.
consurcd him severely for ht action.
Horn, witness said, wanted the letter
To show his Brigham street cons,ltu.
cntr Mr.. Wells admitted having
copied the lsttcr In the oompany's
copying book. The book was offered
IN evidence for the purpose ~ showing
that the i~tar ~ Horns was written
other communications we're. An cnoft
on the pnft ~ the "Ncwa" reporter 70
cnpy the letter proved unavailable
EN.Cnuncilman w. =. O'Mesra tes.
ih1d that nc meeting u the City
Council como time 100 1895. he rsmem.
bored one Or the memhH re- cnquiring N
Francis Armstrong; while tn amend
NI. - Naaas
under discussion. N he would release
brigham sireft Mr.. Armsrlng's re-
ply was that be- could not. az the come
pany't right N way was an bonded.
witness was positive that Mr ARM
strong did not lrrae 90 abandon she
street. 1fe might nave been f1nrwhti
evhflvf In his answfrs Mf. O'Me1ra
also recalled Armstrong saying ihfi
his company did not Intend % build
right away. he could not remember
who che member yiH thft put the
question to Armr'rt1g.
County Commifs'1ngr Francis Arm.
strong was then examined. He said
Ne was director of the sirsaf railroad
company prior i1 1859 and was mayor
~ salt Lake cry when his complny
was granted franchise. The first
time any objection was raised 60 the
gonpiny extending re line was In 1902
The occasion was while she am ndmont
70 the c1mrlnNH franchise was being
discussed W the city fithcra J.. q.
Cdnklin ani W. D. smeiiey wsre Ch1
only ones who cfma 60 him personally
about the mat,. Never taxed with
James GlsnlInn,nR
a. one meeting N thr Council com.
nliiees. 20 which witnca1 had haen In.
Nied. he was fHksd " the company
would abandon Bia, s1uih Temple
street. ami she reply b. made was h.
asked n such . thing was possible
would h. vote Tor ~ and H. replied h.
would NOS. Mr.. Armstrong explained
That H. was referring 60 q committee
OF the Council ~ 1896
referring 90 Mf Horns visit % the
complny'H ofilce ln isal Mr. Armstrong
said he only recalled ar Rich bling
with Horn. The only persons In ~
uiico At fhe Time was SHcr.eHry Wells
ana the other clerks He dll not eay
the extension project had been ahan-
dnned, or that the company would not
huili wlthuW The c1nFrrt ~ the pr0p.
cry owners having ffrt been Obj iinad.
No director Of the company 10 FAR a.
witness know, had ever intimHtad that
any portion uf the franchise would or
ought 60 be given up. lfe attended
imgsi ~ the meetings N the board y
DIRECTORS and would certainly have
htnrd OF u had che question Of relin-
gushing ever beon mopiet
oiher witnesses were un1FrroinF ~.
ninlnluons when she "News' report
closed.