The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-12-03
IN THE DISTRICT COURTS
Some Important Matters Disposed
Of During Last Week.
Interest in the Decision of Justice
Barnard Regarding an Oil Storage
Tank - Hearing of the Case of
Nolan Against the Chesapeake
and Potomac Telephone Company.

The most important matters considered
and disposed of during the last week. in
the Supreme Court OF the District, were
in the equity division Of the court. One
of these was the decision of Justice Bar
nard in what is known as the Standard Oil
case, and the other the hearing in the
case of Nolan against the Chesapeake and
Potomac Telephone Company, which was
begun on Saturday in the same court. In
the criminal divisions of the court there
were no cases of public importance con-
sidered. There were, however, number
of prisoners sentenced who had been pre-
viously convicted. These were removed to
the penitentiary at Moundsville, w. Va,
on Friday night last.
No case which has been disposed of in
the Supreme Court Of the District in re-
cent years has been watched SO closely
both by the members of the local bar and
the public generally as the Standard Oil
case. The litigation against the Standard
Oil Company was begun in February, 1897,
| by Messrs John G. Oeser and William
Downing and others, residents of South
Washington, with a view to restrain the
Standard Oil people from maintaining its
plant at It's present location, In South
west Washington. The compliments OBJ
a certain tank which was then being con-
structed for the purpose Of storilg oils.
and asked the court to enjOin the defend
ant from using it when 1t was completed.
The complainants in their petition Tor an
Injunction declared that the maintaining
OF the plant on its premises in South
Washington was not only dangerous to
the safety Of property in the immediate
vicinity, but also detrimental to the
health and comfort OF the residents Of
that part Of the city.
The matter was submitted to one Of the
justices of the Supreme Court of the Dis
trict who granted a temporary restrain
ing order, enjoining the Standard Oil
Company from the completion Of the oil
tank referred to, which was then in
course of construction. The oil company
took an appeal to the Court of appeals
from the judgment OF the Supreme Court
of the District. Upon hearing in the up
per court the restraining order was modi-
fed in that II permitted the defendant to
complete the oil tank. II was not. how
ever, to be permitted to use 1t FOR the
purpose of storing oils.
The case was then ordered for hearing,
and both parties began to take testimony
Everything went on seemingly well until
in July, 1893, the complainants filed petit
ton asking that the Standard Oil people
be ruled for contempt of court for alleged
violation Of the restraining order issued
against them in 1897. When the matter
came on for hearing the complainants de-
clared that the Standard Oil Company had
been using the oil tank, the use of which
had been debarred by the Injunction of the
court.
After a hearing which occupied several
days the court held that the temporary
Injunction had not been violated by the
defendant.
The taking of testimony preparatory
for the final hearing was then continued
by the parties to the litigation. The case
came up for argument June last. The
reading OF the evidence. alone, occupied
nearly two weeks. and the arguments of
counsel Q week more. By agreement be-