Shoshone journal. [volume] (Shoshone, Idaho) 1884-1931, 1907-10-04
HEPBURN BRIDGE CASE.
Interesting Court Hearing on the
Much Disputed Case.

The Hepburn bridge injunction case
was heard by Judge Walters in cham
bers Wednesday afternoon. Attorneys
Harriott of Twin Falls and Howell of
Oakley represented the plaintiff, J. E.
Miller, and J. C. Rogers of Burley the
defendant, Edwin Verburg.
After reading excerpts from a com
plant covering twenty-five or thirty
typewriter pages in which Mr. Miller
stated that he had been damaged in
enough ways to swamp the ordinary
mortal and that he feared everything
from black eye to battle, murder and
riot at the hands of the defendant and
the people of Hepburn, the examina-
tion of witnesses began.
]. E. Miller was the first witness
called and testified that he is the owner
of the land at the Cassia county end of
the bridge and that the land had been
fenced and used as a pasture for many
years. That the defendant tore down
part of the fence and moved it twenty
five feet east. He said that as the
bridge was being built toward the south
bank of Snake river he informed Mr.
Verburg that it was approaching his
land and that he would not allow it to
land upon his property. He talked
with Verburg at the time he (Miller)
fenced across the road, stopping travel
over the bridge Mr. Verburg told
him that if he persisted in crossing the
road there would be trouble and Mr.
Miller feared that an armed mob of
Heyburnites might descend upon the
peaceful Burley townsite and wipe it
off the map. Under a sharp cross ex-
animation by Judge Rogers, attorney
for the defence, Miller admitted that
he did not own the fence torn down by
Verburg and that Verburg had started
to build a new fence that would prevent /
the escape of Miller's stock but that
he had been prevented from finishing
it and that while he knew from the
time the first pilings of the bridge were
driven until it was finished and from
ten to twenty-five teams daily passing
over it he took no legal steps to stop
him. During the testimony of Mr..
Miller a map was submitted to prove
his title to the land upon which the
bridge ends.
Frank Riblett, a civil engineer, was
the next witness. He testified as to
running the lines in discussion and
pointed them out to the judge. Under
cross examination he told the court
that he depended largely upon the
figures given him by his chainmen,
by Mr.. Miller, and upon
rather obscurely marked corners and
that he might have been mistaken 80
or 60 feet.
Edward C. Davis, secretary of the
Burley Townsite company of which J.
E. Miller is president, was next called.
He testified that sometime during May
Or June he overheard a conversation
between Mr.. Verburg and Mr.. Miller
about the bridge in the company's
office. He recalled that Mr.. Miller
told Verburg that the bridge would
strike Miller's land and that he did net
want it. He remembered nothing more
hat was said.
Edwin Verburg was the first witness Z
called for the defence He told of the
building of the bridge and how he got
permission from Robert Mcbride to
move his fence 25 feet east to open !
Dad from the fence to the main road,
which remained open for number of
lays and that from ten to twenty-five
cams crossed the bridge daily. He
estified that Mr. Miller made no OBJ
ection to the building of the bridge or
DAD until both were completed and
hat he had no conversation with Miller
bout the bridge between February
nd August; that the first objection Z
lade by Miller was when he fenced :