Omaha daily bee., 1899-01-29
GOLD NINE DEAL IN COURT
Judge Thornell Patiently Listens to the
Contention of Lawyers,
COMPLETION OF THE HEARING IS REACHED
Intination that Doyle Fraudulently
Secured Il Judgment Against
Burns and that IL should
he Set Aside.

rOr over ten nOuTb yesterday JuuSe
Thornell in the district court sat patiently
listening to the Of counsel upon
the motion 10 set aside the judgment taken
by James A. Doyle in his now famous suit
against John F. Burns. president of the
Portland Gold Mining company Of Colorado.
In order to complete the hearing yesterday
Judge Thornell held a special session last
night, at which John N. Baldwin. counsel
for Doyle. made his closing reply to Mr..
Patterson's concluding argument in support
of the motion.
When court convened yesterday morning
Mr.. Baldwin resumed his argument and
spoke for six hours with a. adjournment
Of an hour for dinner. Mr.. Patterson then
followed with his closing argument and
spoke until court adjourned at 6 o'clock.
Mr.. Baldwin Informed the court that he
would like TO make a reply to Mr.. Patterson
and Judge Thornell agreed to hold a special
session in the evening.
Mr.. Baldwin's argument was the conten-
ton that Burns was served with personal
notice of the action here; that he appeared
and filed a motion TO quash service OF this
notice. Burns commended that this notice
constituted simply a special appearance.
That question was thoroughly argued to
Judge Smith, who overruled Burns motion
anu Nv 'hdt IL q wv " cpNN'N'' D'N " So
eral appearance. 1t therefore became neces-
sary for Burns to plead. However, before he
did anything further in the courts here he
| went to Colorado and secured an injunction
| against Doyle there, restraining him from
continuing his case in the Iowa courts; that
in this proceeding in Colorado he took the
action already had in the court here to base
his application for an injunction there: that
the proceeding in Colorado was illegal and
unla wful; that Burns used the knowledge
he had OF the pendancy of the action here in
the proceeding there: that Doyle upon
proper advice refused to comply with the
Colorado order and took his judgment; that
Burns was now in this court asking to set
aside this judgment. but In order to do this
two things must be shown-frst. that Burns
had a defense. and second. a reasonable ex-
cuse for not answering and preventing judg-
ment here. Burns. he commended. had abso-
lutely failed to show any reason or excuse
such as contemplated by the statute. viz;
accident, mistake. death. surprise or lack
Of knowledge. None of these existed. He
further contended that Burns had defed the
processes of the Iowa court and had, and is,
using the processes of the court Of Colorado
for depressing Doyle: that the Iowa court,
having jurisdiction OF the parties and the
subject matter and having acquired that
Jurisdiction first. the law and the c~onstitu-
ton Of the United States required the courts
Of Colorado 10 recognize the proceeding
here, and on the reason Of comfy between
| the two states should have refused to inter-
fere.
Mr.. Baldwin In concluding his argument
further insisted that Burns had a proceed
Ing in this court and a proceeding in Colo
RADIO. but that he had confidence in neither
and was experimenting with both: that he
was afraid of his position in each and de-
sired to hold on to both: that he took the
record Of this court to Colorado and used
it to get an injunction there and having Sc
cured that injunction upon this record ne
used it to Cypress Doyle and incarcerate
him. Then finding that Doyle would not
yield to the oppression, after seven months
Of experimenting in Colorado, Burns brought
the very same transcript from the Colorado
court down here, filed 1t in this court and
asked that upon that very same record, and
with which he is keeping Doyle in jail, this
court for mercy and l~eniency and begged this
court upon that same record in the exercise
Of its discretion to permit him TO plead here.
Mr.. Patterson in his closing argument con-
tended that Doyle had secured his Judgment
by fraudulent and perjured testimony and
that II he had a right cause of action against
Burns he would not be afraid to bring his
suit in the courts OF Colorado, but this coun-
sci insisted he did not dare do. He said he
could easily understand that Doyle was will
ing to defy the courts of his state if he
could have close upon 81 ,000, 900 to heal his
wounds with. The judgment should, he in
sisted. be set aside in the interest of law
and justice.