Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1899-03-02
The TWO CENT MILEAGE LAW
RUTLAND RAILROAD FIGHTING ITS
PROVISIONS IN U. S. COURT.
Hearing in Progress on tho Question Of
Continuing the Temporary Injunction
While the Suit is Tending Other
Business of the Opening Day.

The regular February term OF the Uni
ted states Courts was opened in this city
Tuesday morning at 10 O'Clock in tho
court house. The court was in session IN
til O'Clock in the afternoon, when an adj
iournment was taken until Wednesday
at $3.50. The morning session was occu-
pied with the calling of the grand and pc
tit jurors and the instructions of Judge
Wheeler to the former body, which then
retired to perform its duties. At the af-
ternoon session arguments were made an
the motion for an injunction in the mile
age case Of the Rutland Railroad company
and the demurrer of the attorneys of the
State.
a large representation of the attorneys
OF the State was present at the opening
of court in the morning and others came
upon the noon TRAIN. The proclamation
for the opening of the Circuit and District
Courts was made by Thomas Failey who
served Tuesday in the double duty Of
baiif and court crer, the incumbent of
the latter Office George w. Fisk, being i'll.
Proclamation was made for the grand jury
which is follows: J. G. Bellrose of Bur-
lington T. W. Booth of Essex Junction,
l.. q. Burnham of Burlington, l.. II. Chap
IN OF Jericho, j. A. Donahue of Essex, Or
Wis Fits of Cabot, l.. G. Grant of Burling-
ton. Il. C. Hall of st. Adams, A. II. Keith
of Montpelier, John Lawson of Enosburgh,
c. =. V. Lewis of Bakersfield, Il. +. y.
Northrup of Sheldon. d. X. Patrick of
Hinesburgh, d. NJ Rose of Enosburgh, +.
VI. Sutton of Burlington, John T.. Sennott
of Bakersfield, A. c. Sherman of Fairfield,
w. w. w. Thompson of Milton, W. c.
Walker of Montpelier, Frank wilkins OF
Wiliston. A. r. Keith has died since the
drawing of the jury and j. G. Bellrose, L..
c. Grant. l.. G. Burnham of burlington
and A. G. Sherman of Fairfield were ex-
cused.
la Mt q
tit jury and the following names were
called:
l.. =. Adams of Swanton, George Atkins
of Montpelier, A. A. Brownell of Essex
Junction, G. A. Barber of Burlington, Hen
ry Brewster of Huntington, Collins Blake
ly of Montpelier, George Brown of Essex.
Jos. Billings Of Morrisvile l.. Bart Cross
of MONTPELIER w. G. Doan of johnson. y.
q. Davis of Hyde Park, Fred a. Drury Of
South Burlington, Hugh Donaldson of
Swanton A. Is. Edwards of Wnooski, SAT-
ford Ray of Richmond, A. w. Foster Of
Wolcott. George II. Holden of Burlington.
Luther r.. Hunt of Fairfax, George Harris
of stowe, Il. G. Keenan, of ST. Adams. G.
Lyon of Waterbury Centre. J. A. Lockin
of Montpelier, II. p. Munson of Morris
vile, W. j. Metcalf of Williston, r. $.
Peck of Burlington, }. B. Phillips
of MorctOwn, ID. w. Robinson
OF Burlington, y. C. Raymore of
Cambridge b. r. Seymour of Burlington,
c. n. Smith of Burlington, J. V. Stevens
of Waterville, L. l.. Smith of Barre. Frank
Strong of Hyde Park. C. p. Sherman of
Moretown, Solomon Walker of Burlington.
OF this number George Harris of Stowe
was excused there being two men Of that
name, both of whom refused to accept
} service on the ground that he was not the
man called for. A. Il. Edwards of WinOo-
ski was excused on account of illness as
was also b. r. Seymour of this city. Hen
ry c. Hall was appointed foreman of the
jury and after receiving the instructions
OF the court they retired.
The calling Of the docket showed only
q small number of cases for trial, none
of which is of more than ordinary i'm
portance.
During the day District Attorney J. L.
Martin presented the following attorneys
who were admitted to practice in the
court on taking the oath: r. Il. Brown,
Charles T.. Allen and A. l.. Sherman of
Burlington, II. c. Bates, Harry Blodgett
and Elisha May of St Johnsbury; j. II.
Montefiore and f.. A. Ashland of Stall
bans. Jed p. Ladd of East Alburgh, G.
Il. Lord of Richford, L. b. Finn of
Springfield. g. c. Hall and j. G.. Keenan,
were also admitted to practice in the
court.
Some little matters of court business
: were disposed Of, after which the court
: adjourned until o'clock in the afternoon
, On the rcasscmbling of court in the az
ternoon the petit Jurors were excused un-
= I'll Wednesday at $50 and court took ur
the case of George II. Ball ct ais, vs.. the
Rutland Railroad company, ct ais which
is Il suit restraining the company from
compliance with the law relating to mi
leage books passed by the last General
Assembly and requiring all railroads in
the State to place on sale mileage books
good to bearer at the rate of two cents
, per mile, The compliments asked that the
temporary injunction be continued during
the tendency of the suit The several
states attorneys. who are defendants de-
INJURED to the bill. A hearing was had
= upon the question of continuing the in
. junction.
! The states attorneys, who are empow-
, cred to enforce the law by their demrr-
+ rer claimed that as they are the officers
agents and representatives. of the people
of the State and that as such under the
= ruling recently made by the Uni
, ted States Supreme Court no in
. junction would lie against them
They further claim that the Rut-
land Railroad company has no contract
with the State by virtue of which it
claims right to fix the tariff of passen-
ger tariff They further claim that Rut-
land Railroad company has no contract
with the State by virtue of its charter OF
which it cannot fix the tariff of the road
They also claim that the suit so far as
l the complaints and the defendants are
| concerned is a friendly suit brought by
agreement to test the law in question and
that the Rutland Railroad company in nc
way contests. They also claim that the
; injunction should not be continued, That
after full hearing If 1t is determined that
the compainants were right a permanent
Injunction can be issued. They further
claim that the Rutland Railroad company
SO far as the bill shows, had neither by
! vote or otherwise declared to take actor
in the matter and defend the rights of its
stockholders under the mileage law.
! The complainants insisted that they
We're entitled to permanent injunction
l under the condition and that the late de,
cision of the Supreme Court cited, hold
ing that officers like States attorneys
Z could be enjoined in certain proceedings
! had no application in the suit; that the
Rutland Railroad company has such &
b contract with the State as Is set forth and
l that contract is decision of the matter
. involved that If the bill does not set forth
u with sufficient particularly that the de
PENDANT, the Rutland Railroad company
!, had declared by vote or otherwise the pro
i tests of the stockholders against the mile
age law the States attorneys could no.
pany only could do this and 1t had by the
. answer admitted the truth of all the es
sential allegations in the bill
The complainants were represented by
: Michael ii. Cardozo of New York, w. w
Stickney of Ludlow and w. II. Button o.
u Middlebury; the Rutland Railroad com
pany by +. NJ, Meldon and the severa
u States attorneys by T.. L. Fish of Yer
GENES and by -. j. Foster chairman o