The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-04-09

On the relation of John Dern, David
Keith, T. R. Jones, Theron Geddes and
Henry ]. Mcmillan, a suit was yester-
day filed in the district court by Attor-
ney General Bishop on behalf of the
state of Utah against the Salt Lake
City Railroad company, praying that 1t
be adjudged that the defendant COM
pany has no corporate rights, DrlVl-
leges and franchises to construct or
operate a street car line on East South
Temple street brigham street,, east OF
Z street, and also that it be adiudged
that the defendant has forfeited any
and all rights it ever may have had or
acquired from the territory or state of
Utah to construct and operate street
railroad upon said portion of said
street, and that the defendant COM
pany has. by non-user, and also by mis-
user, forfeited and lost any privileges
and franchises it may have heretofore
possessed to construct and operate a
street car line upon said portion of the
street; also that the company has sur
rendered all it's corporate rights, privi
leSes and franchises to the extent OF
constructing a street car line upon that
portion of the street, and that pending
the action the company may be re-
strained from laying the track. A tenn
Judge Cherry, made returnable on Mon
day morning.
OLD ACTION IN NEW FORM.
This is the same suit in a different
form which was brought in the indi-
vidual names of John Dern and other
residents of East Brigham street
against the City Railroad company
some months ago, and which was de-
cided in favor of the defendant by
Judge Hiles, whose Judgment was af-
firmed by the supreme court. The opin-
ion handed down by the latter tribunal
at that time held that individuals had
no standing in court in an action in
Volving the validity of d franchise
granted by the municipal corporation
under the act of the legislature, and the
opinion intimated that an action
brought by the state would lie, hence
the renewal of the proceedings in their
present form
As reasons why the prayer of the re-
lators should be granted, it is set out
in the petition that the defendant COM
pany was incorporated on Jan. 26, 1872,
and that on Jan. so, 1873 the articles
OF incorporation were amended by the
elimination from the franchise Of that
part of Brigham street east of Z street,
and that now the company has no fran
chise to build or operate a car line on
that portion of the street
The petition then goes on to state that
on Feb. 20. 1899, the company attempt
ed TO amend its articles of incorpora-
ton so as to include in its franchise all
The streets in the corporate limits, but
chat it failed to comply with the law,
which requires that a complete sur
Vey Of the territory included be filed
with the secretary of state and that
the company also failed to comply with
the law in that it did not file copy of
the amendment to its articles of incor-
poraton with the secretary of state
1t is further claimed that by non-user
and abandonment the company has for
feited any and all rights it may have
possessed to operate a car line on that
portion of Brigham street, and that the
company repeatedly informed the prop
eray-owners on the street that it had
abandoned its right to lay tracks there.
In conclusion, it is alleged that on
April 4 1899, the company commenced
laying tracks on the disputed portion of
the street; that the neighborhood al
ready has all the car facilities it needs;
that the value of property on both sides
of the street has increased in value
because of the absence of d car line, and
that if the defendant is allowed to Law
tracks and operate a street car line
there, it viii damage the property OF
these plaintiffs and others to the extent
of 500 600