The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1899-11-08

Seldom does a law suit have such
an array OF prominent witnesses as
those who were present yesterday In
the superior court room to give testi-
mony in the equity case Of the Mt.
Pleasant Coal company against the
Delaware, Lockawanna and Western
Railroad company, which Judge Arch
bald called fer hearing just after the
noon adjournment.
w. F. Hallstead, second vice-presl-
dent; F.. #. Loonis, superintendent Of
mining; A. g. Salisbury, division SUI
perintendent; Garret Boeert, former
superintendent; James Archibald, fornl-
er chief engineer and John Snyder,
chief mining engineer, were some of
the officials and ex-ofJicials OF the Lack
awanna who were numbered in this ar
ray. T.. L. Fuller, president Of the
Mt. Pleasant company, Edward Merri-
field, y. S. Jones cx-Alderman John
Cawley, Dominick Healey and a num-
Der Of the old time miners who worked
at the Mt. Pleasant ir its earliest days
were other of the witnesses.
RECORD TESTIMONY.
The testimony yesterday was mainly
or a record character, the plaintiff re-
lying mainly on deeds and like con-
vcyances to establish it's contention.
The defendant will present about twen-
ty witnesses to give oral testimony and
ii is probable the case will consume
all of today and a good portion of to-
morrow.
The suit grows out of the determin-
alton of the Mt. Pleasant company to
divert its shipments from the Lack
Hwanna to the Ontario and Western.
Its breaker is on the westerly side of
the Lackawanna tracks, and the On
tario and Western spur which will
take the coal to the main line is TO
have its terminal ut chutcs to be erect
ed on the opposite side.
TO carry the coal from the breaker 20
the chutes, it is proposed to construct
a bridge over the tracks which will
support a series of belt Conveyors. The
Lackawanna company denies the right
Of the plaintiff to cross it's right of way
in this manner and also contends that
the present narrow bridge connecting
the breaker and dump must be re-
moved by January /, 1900, when tho
shipping contract between the twa
companies expires.
The Lackawannna company AYERS
that the plaintiff has no rights in the
premises excepting those it enjoys
through the sufferance OF the Lacka
wanna 1t claims that the present culu,
bridge was permitted to be erected
solely in consideration of the contract
between the two companies and that
when the contract expires the right to
the overhead crossing lapses.
PLAINTIFFS CONTENTION.
The Mt. Pleasant company denies
any such understanding and holds
that its predecessors in title to the Mt
Pleasant property, owned the present
Lackawanna right of way and in dis.
posing Of it to the l.acliawanna stipu.
lated that it should hold it for railroad
purposes only. 1t is also contended by
the plaintiff that the franchise of tht
Lackawanna prescribes that whcrevel
| it's tracks divide q property the owner
| shall have an overhead right of way
| to be erected at the expense of ths
| railroad company.
Further than this. the plaintiff COM
pany contends it had a right of way
at grade over the tracks and main.
! tanned it for years, abandoning 1t only
in consideration of the overhead right
/ of way.
| There are any number of lateral con-
| Do