Arizona republican., 1903-07-07

bles or desks. 8 rural carrier sorting
 desks, , stoves, 2 safes, ? high stools, ,
 carrier stools. l stepladder, 1 set oc
 lockers. l canceiling table. all of the
 value of $5O00.
 As has already been mentioned, the
 postofice. it was expected, would be
 removed to it's new quarters by the lst
 of July, and the government. eXsrcis-\ ing a clause of it's contract with the
 plaintiff cancelled its lease. the cam cellation to go into effect on that date.
 The postmaster had received quasi or
 ders to move not later than that date,
 but long before it was seen that the
 new building would not be ready.
 There is some conflict of testimony as , to the negotiations between the, owners
 O.; the new building and the lessors of
 the old It was reported that the own CTS of the present location had been offered s100 d month for the time that
 the office remained in it's present quar- ters, but if such an offer was made it appears that it was subsequently with drawn. It was made, however. yester- Gay. after the filing of the papers and was rejected.
 -Thc papers in the case were put into
 the hands of Sheriff Cook. who con
 
 that it would not be well to get into q conflict with the United States gov-I ernment that it would be better to. fight the Orchard Grove Investment company on his bond. There could be
 no harm in serving the papers. but it would be exceedingly dangerous to
 proceed in the ordinary way in replevin cases and seize anything CT perform any act that might interfere with the postal service.
 The plaintiff probably did not con- template the seizure of any of the | property described in the complaint. It
 seems to be only laying the foundation for a claim against the government
 and in the nature of things it will
 probably be allowed, though may be not ! in full. There is a demand for the prop erty and fer damages in the sum Of $5.000 and for mesns profits, that is | for the profits of tbe business between | the 1st of July and the date when the | plaintiff shall be put in possession of itg own. It may be remarked in pass
 ing that if the Phoenix office is not making any more money chan the oth- CT offices throughout the country, the payment of the mesne profits to the plaintiffs will not greatly embarrass the ] government.
 The papers were served upon the 1 postmaster late in the afternoon. He ] denied that he had personal possession | of any property described in the com | plaint. but as the agent of the govern | ment had control of the property which was now in use in the postofice. ! Return las not yet been made by the sheriff. but it will probably set forth | the reply of the defendant
 | r. is claimed by the plaintiff. though ! it is not mentioned in the complaint ! that the premises have been leased to ! w. F. Cleary. Neither is it stated that | Mir. Smith wants early possession of | the fixtures for the purpose of setting 1 up an opposition postohice. | Not satisfied with setting the ma ! chinery Of the district court in motion. 1 the plaiTtim began forcible entry and | detainrr suit in the court Of Justice | Robertson In this court it is asked
 that tine property bs restored and that
 plaintin be awarded damages in the
 sum of S2O0. The papers were issued
 and mace returnable on July H.
 All this is a very unusual proceeding
 and the situation is an unusual one. It
 is admitted on all sides that the plaint- ih has right tc the immediate pos
 session of it's property. But if that
 right should be enforced there would
 be no mail service in this town for l some time to come and the mails cam rot stop. It is the, practice of the gov | errment to take possession of any | property that it may need for the good
 Of the public and it is also its practice | to pay well for it. That will no doubt | Be done in this case. An interesting | question is, Who will ultimately have
 to pay? That is an interrogatory that possesses an extraordinary interest for ! the members of the Central Avenue | Improvement company.