Arizona republican., 1898-10-02
THE SUPREME COURT
All the Business of the January Term Ended.
A Reversal in inc Case of HenShaW ef al. VS. inc Salt River Valley Canal Company ct al.

The territorial supreme court held a short session yesterday afternoon, handed down opinions in two cases, others, denied all motions for rehear- ing and adjourned for the term
 The most important opinion was one reversing the judgment of Judge Baker in the case of A. L. Henshaw ct al vs. the Salt River Valley Canal company, J. w. Evans, w. D. Full wiler and M. E. Hurley, directors. This suit was begun by the minority share holders of the Salt River Valley canal in the summer of 1895. The plain tiffs were represented by Col. William Herring The complaint, a most voluminous document, prayed in 8 general way for the restoration of the rights of the plaintiff, which had been diverted in favor Of the Arizona Canal company, into which the Salt River Valley canal had been merged. The court spent several days in hearing evidence and arguments on law ques- tions, and foreseeing that all other business was likely to be crowded cut, put the case in the hands of a referee. The taking of the evidence occupied about three months and hestenograph- CTS charges amounted to several thousand dollars. This mass of evil dence and the various papers filed in the case were taker under considera- tion by Judge Baker. The defendants late il the proceedings entered an ob- lection to the complaint, alleging that iI was muFtifariouS and defective as to the parties defendant, in that 1t did not include all the persons that ought to have been included. Nearly two years after the beginning oi the ac- tion Judge Baker rendered a decision sustaining this view and dismissed the case without prejudice. The plain tiffs took an appeal, which has since been pending.
 The opinion of the supreme court, a document of twenty-five typewriter pages, was written by Justice Sloan and concurred in by the other members Of the bench. The case is reviewed from the beginning, though there is nc expression regarding the merits of it until the allegation of the defendants regarding the charge of multifariousnesS has been reached. This is viewed from several sides. Ad- hitting that several complaints are joined together, the opinion holds that
  and as to the charge that the com plaint is defective as to the parties de- fendant, it is suggested that the per sons who ought to have been joined in the defense could have been ordered in by the trial court
 In any event, the ground is taken in the opinion that the objection to the complaint advanced by the defendants ought to have been made in the be- ginning and not withheld until late day. It is also pointed out that the course taken by the action might be fatally prejudiced to the defendants. The statute of limitations, if they were compelled to commence at the beginning, weuld by this time have run its course against them.
 The opinion, however, suggests, in justice to Judge Baker that this mat ter had not been laid before him in the pleadings. The judgment is reversed and the case is ordered to trial. An appeal will be taken to the United States supreme court
 Motions fer rehearing were denied in the following cases: Jordan ys. Schuerman, from Yavapai county; A. L. Johns ct al vs. James Wilson, from Coconino county: J. H. Hampson vs. Frank Dysart, collector and treasurer, from Graham county; Consolidated Canal company vs. Mc-- Crn1I com pany, from Maricopa county; Scott vs. Hurley, from Maricopa county; Kast- ner vs Campbell, from Yavapai county; London, Paris and American bank vs D. A. Abrams, assignee of the Bank of Tempe; in the case of Henry Running vs. J. E. Porter and Scott Bros, from Navajo county, the judg- ment of the lower court was reversed.