Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1901-09-05
Notable Gathering Of Legal Lights
in Supreme Court,
CONDEMNATION HEARING.
Judge Talbot Listens TO Arguments
In the Lincoln County, New, Grade
Dispute To-day IL. IL. News

A formidable array OF legal talent
gathered In the supreme court room
this morning on the occasion OF the
hearing by Judge G. r. Talbot Of Ne
vada, Of the arguments In the novel
condemnation proceedings embraced IN
the complaint Of the Utah, Nevada q
California railroad company against
the San Pedro Los Angeles q Salt
Lake railroad company.
The Hartman interests were repre-
scented by Judge W. h. Kelly, OF oma-
Ia, counsel for the Union Pacific, Judge
LeGrande Young, Of the same system;
Attorney Farley l.. Williams, OF the
Oregon Short Line, and Attorney e.
S. Varlan. For the Clark road, Gem
eral Counsel 7, r. Gibbon and Attor-
ney C. o. Whittem0re appeared.
The morning session was taken up by
Mr. Whittemore, with the exception OF
about five minutes at the close, when
Farley l.. Williams had the floor The
proceedings commenced at ten o'clock.
and from present Indications the argu-
ments Will be concluded today.
While the proceedings In court this
morning might have been possibly te-
dious to the average layman, every
move was followed with interest by
principals and the sprinkling Of the le-
gal fraternity which were present in the
capacity Of spectators. The whole ten
or of the morning session effectively
demonstrated that both sides were
straining every nerve to make every
move tell with the court.
The proceedings were commenced
with the withdrawal Of the demurrer
10 the complaint by the Clark forces.
Then Mr.. Whittemore proceeded to read
the complaint that had been filed by the
plaintiff and introduced a motion which
embraced the cutting out Of some eight
sections and paragraphs on the grounds
that they were immaterial and irreye-
liant.
Taking each OF the paragraphs In
turn, he proceeded to analyse
them. Mr. Whttemore proceeded
10 argue that there was no
allegation In the complaint that
the plaintiffs succeeded TO the
rights OF the old Utah. Nevada & Pa.
cifc. Continuing he maintained that
the fact that the officers Of one corpor-
alton caused another corporation to be
formed and launched In another state
did not OF necessity mean the transfer
of the rights OF the other company.
Then taking up the section which set
forth that 100000 had been spent on
the grade from Uyada TO Clover Valley
Junction. thence 10 Phoebe, MIR. White
more maintained that that had nothing
10 do with the case, as the question
Ncfore the court related to an entirely
different right Of way. He also held
that the statement that the Oregon
Short Line gave mortgage to Eastern
capitalists and subsequently became
financially embarrassed 10 the extent
that the project Of extending the line
was for the time being abandoned and
had no place In the complaint. THE
oregon Short Line Is not party TO
the complaint" he said, the Oregon
Short Line stops at the Nevada line
ana It's officers and stockholders incor-
porated another company" This same
position was taken in the statement re-
gardlng the financial embarrassment"
incident TO the panic. Mr.. Whlttemore
AT this tuncture proceeded 10 wax
somewhat sarcastic and said us there
any need Of Offering or proving such
apologies. Let the apologies failures
and ancient history OF the Oregon Short
Line alone; they have nothing to DO
with this case"
The A. W. McCune feature Of the
next paragraph, which embraced
short history Of the Utah g. Pacific.
and the subsequent taking over OF the
road by the Short Line, was objected
10 on the same ground that the Utah &
Pacific had nothing TO do with the
Utah, Nevada q California. MIR.
Whittemore suggested that possibly IL
was introduced In order TO convince the
court that the Oregon Short Line would
ultimately, at some date In the future.
push on the line. He maintained that
" was not necessary under the laws OF
the state OF Nevada 10 show that there
was an auxiliary railroad company be-
hind any project In order TO establish
its rights.
The right OF way OF the plaintiff.
Mr. Whittemore contended. extended
from Uvada 20 Glover Valley Junction
and thence TO Phoebe. Consequently
there was nothing. he maintained, upon
which 10 institute Condemnation pro-
ceedlngs on the right OF way OF the
San Pedro road below Clover Valley
Junction on the Culverville ranch. The
intention OF the Short Line TO build al
some date, as set forth In the COM
plant, Mr.. Whittemore contended was
outside the consideration Of the court
In this case. He therefore asked that
the paragraphs he cited should be
stricken out Of the complaint.
At the conclusion Of Attorney Whit
temore's argument Counsel Farley /,
Williams OF the Oregon Short Line
arose and stated that he had omitted
Inadvertently an important sentence I'm
Section 10 Of the original complaint
iiled. After an objection on the part OF
Counsel T. f.. Glbbon, a portion OF the
paragraph was allowed 10 be stricken
out and the words "and has succeeded
10 all Of the interests owned and ac-
quired by the Oregon Short Line and
Utah Northern" added.
The court then adjourned until 2:3O
p m, when the arguments In the case
We're begun.