The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1900-12-20

Will oil luO improvements L11oI AAeA 2
been made. In the absence of any clause
specifying a perpetual interest in the
lines on the part of the companies, it Is
claimed that as the contracts have eX-
pired the railway company is the sole
owner of the telegraph lines in dispute.
The telegraph companies have been Of
fered reasonable compensation for any
interest they may think they own In the
lines, but they have refused to, accept
it, claiming that they are still part own
ers of the system of wires and poles.
The array of counsel in the case is i'm
posing. For the railway company M.
d. Grover is the chief pleader assisted by
George B. Young. The Western Union
company is represented by Judge John
f. Dillon, OF New York; Rush Taggart,
of Chicago, and c. NJ. Ferguson, of Min
neapoHs. George C. Ripley and Leon
Lum appear on behalf of the North
western Telegraph company.
Mr.. Grover opened Vne case for the
compliments, and spoke until the adj
journment was made for the day. At
that time he had concluded presenting
his clients side of the case. He will
be followed this morning by the counsel
representing the other side.
In opening the case Mr.. Grover al
legged that the plaintiff company as
serted sole title and the exclusive right
to the possession and control of the lines
of telegraph along plaintiffs line of road
from St. Paul. 1t sought to restrain de-
PENDANTS from operating the telegraph
lines or from interfering with the plain
tiff company in it's operation
Two contracts were. set forth, one with
the Northwestern and another with the
Western Union, under which the tele
graph lines were constructed, and by the
terms of which the defendants had the
right of user Contract A had been SUI
perseded by Contract B and Contract B
had expired by limitation, so that all
rights of defendants had ceased. The
bill offered on the part of the plaintiff to
do equity as against any rights asserted
by the defendants.
The defendants asserted that the two
contracts were in force and that the
Western Union is either the owner or
the lessee of the telegraph lines; that
the railroad has only an interest Of quail
flied right of user as defined in the con-
tract.
Mr.. Grover said the defendants had
filed a cross till in which they sought to
establish right of condemnation and
decree giving the right to maintain their
wires and poles along the right Of way
of plaintiffs road.
Mr. Grover maintained that the North
western had no exclusive right; that any
other telegraph company could build
competing line; that the Manitoba was
not required to use the line of the North
western; that the Northwestern was re-
quired to build its lines as soon as the
road was completed, each to bear one
half the cost; no successors or assigns
were named in the contract.
Mr. Grover stated that the Northwest
ern constructed 853 miles of poles and
1887 miles of wire up to May Z, 1881
when the Northwestern turned over to
h. Tlin oil hI1CinQSC a
ninety-nine years lease. In July the
plaintiff company was notified by the
Western Union of the lease. The North
western had been notified by the piain~
tiff company that its telegraph lines
along the right of way were in bad con-
dition. The latter promised to make re-
pairs as per the contract. Fault was
found with the contract in this respect.
Mr. Grover said further that there was
no provision in the contract authorizing
a transfer of the telegraph lines either
by lease or otherwise. The plaintiff con-
tended that the lease meant a cancella-
ton of contract. A reference was here
made to communications and negotia-
lions between the officers Of the raj . ay
company and the officials of the tele-
graph companies. Mr.. Hill, for the Great
Northern, and Mr. ClOughry, for the
Western Union, held number Of consul
tations at which, according to Mr.. Grow
er. the former evinced desire to pur-
chase the telegraph lines. The latter said
the Western Union was in to stay and
would not sell.
Mr.. Grover referred to the differences
in the provisions of contracts known as
A and B. Under contract the tele>
graph companies would furnish the ma
terial; the railway company, the labor;
the telegraph company, the labor and
material for extensions; the Westera
Union had the exclusive right along
PLAINTIFFS right of way as against COM
peting companies the plaintiff was pre-
cluded from building a telegraph line, and
the contract was limited as to time.
The defendants maintained that con.
tract B abrogated contract A. and that
the defendants were estopped to deny
the power of the Western Union to make
a new contract; that neither of the de-
PENDANTS could claim anything under
contract A, and that IS to lines built
since July, 1882. neither defendant could
claim anything under, contract A.
The contention of the defendant in
brief is that contract A is still in force:
that it was not abrogated by contract
B, and that contract E expired by liniita