The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-05-20
Parley's Conduit Case Goes Against
the City.
PLAINTIFFS DISPLEASED
NOTICE GIVEN OF MOTION FOR
A NEW TRIAL.
Jury Arrived at a Verdict After
Eight Hours of Deliberation,
Shortly After O'Clock Last Night
History of Case That Has In
volved Much Vexatious Litigation.

The jury in the suit of ]. II. Smith
ct al against Salt Lake City, better
known as the Parley's canyon conduit
case, last night returned verdict civ
ing the plaintiffs judgment to the
amount of 81, 1896. This is more than
twice as much as Referee Farley l..
Williams, who last tried the SUIT, gave
the plaintiffs.
The case has been on trial for the
last ten days in the United States
court before Judge Hallet of Denver
A mass of evidence was introduced by
both sides, and the hearing was very
tedious. The final arguments were
finished yesterday morning, and the
case went TO the jury shortly before
noon.
Worked BY Arithmetic.
Throughout the afternoon. and until
s o'clock last night, the jurors argued
the question. On the first ballot they
were wide apart in their estimates as
to the amount of the judgment the
plaintiffs ought to receive. Other bal
lots were taken, and the final result
looks very much as If it had been ar
rived at by an arithmetical process. Al
though none of the jurors would talk
about what had happened in the jury
room, it was intimated that each man
had written down his idea of the judg-
ment and then the total was divided by
twelve. The odd dollars and cents lends
color to this report.
Attorney Reuter- of Denver, who was
one of the prominent lawyers for the
plaintiffs, was the only representative
of the legal fraternity in court when
the Jury returned its verdict. This nap
pened at o'clock last night, Judge
Hallet having been called from the res
idence of DR.. Union Worthington, with
whom he is stopping, to preside.
After the verdict had been read, Mr..
Reuter- gave formal notice that he
would today move for new trial. To
The Herald Mr.. Reuter- said: Il am
not at all satisfied with the judgment.
My clients have been kept out of their
money, some $4,000, for seven years,
and now they only get a judgment for
about one-fourth of that sum. They
should have had a verdict for the full
amount"
History of the Case.
The case of Smith ct al. against the
city has become a cause celebre. 1t
grew out of the failure of the con-
tractor who started to build the Par
ley's canyon conduit TO finish his con-
tract. His bondsmen, who were all
Denver men, took up the job, and when
it was finished they brought suit for
$50, 900, claiming that this amount was
due on account of arbitrary changes
made by the city engineer and board
of public works in the character Of the
work.
The first hearing was had in 1898 be-
fore Referee Farley L. Williams. Mr..
Williams, after hearing evidence for
about fifteen days, decided adversely
to the plaintiffs, refusing to allow them
a dollar Judge Hallet reviewed the
findings, Judge Marshall being an at
torney in the case. He reversed the
decision of Mr. Williams, and ordered
rehearing. On the second trial the ref
cree gave the plaintiffs judgment In
the sum of 10000
They were not satisfied with this,
and prepared a bill of exceptions,
which was submitted to Judge Hallet,
with the result that the second decision
was reversed. On reviewing the case
again, Judge Hallet found that some
questions of fact were involved, and
he decided TO let a jury pass on the
matter.
Last nights verdict was the result.
If a judgment for the full amount
asked had been given, the city would
have been compelled TO pay more than
100000, for the per cent interest sued
for would have increased the original
SS3, 900 to this sum.