The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1913-12-19
CEMENT CASE POST
PONED TO NEXT
TERM.
JUDGE FORSYTHE so RULES AFTER
HEARING APPLICATION OF CE-
HEHT COMPANY LAST
FRIDAY.

The application of the Tidewater
Portland Cement Company for a con-
tlnnance of the trial OF the indictment
against It until at least the next term
Of Court. which will occur In Febru-
afy. 1914. was heard by Judge For
sythe on Friday last.
Il vii be remembered that the In
dietment charges the Company with
30 conducting It's business that large
quantity Of dust escapes from the
stacks Of the cement plant and when
the wind Is blowing towards Union
bridge. the dust settles on the houses
and streets Of the town to the great
inconvenience of the inhabitants. The
case had been set for trial for Mon
day. December sth, and then postpon-
ed for Monday. December 18th, in or
der that this application for con-
tInuanee could be fully heard.
The Company was represented by
John Il. ReifsnIder, Edgar II. Cans
and William ]. oBrlen, Jr., and the
prosecution by u. o. Weant, States
Attorney. The company showed that
It had q large investment In the plant
which Hag Of the most modern and
approved construction, and employed
9ZA84ZA Til &C anu tphI
With 4 yearly pay roll OF about $780,
900.
Il seems from the proof-that all
cement plants throw of dust because
of the necessity of crushing and dry
In Tie materials. This dust is valu-
able 70 the company, and II It could
b prevented from escaping. II would
aafe loss Of about 500 a day, SO
that The company Is interested IN con-
IinIng It. There are one hundred and
three cement plants in the United
States. Of which only three have ap-
nllaneez 10 prevent the escape of dust.
These appliances have been thorough
i investigated BY the Company, and
none of these can be used on plant
of this construction. The company Ia
nnH eHdeaYoring TO ascertain whether
4 dust appliance which has been in
nHe N Germany in a plant OF similar
construction to the Union Bridge
plant. ean be used here, and offered
10 make every effort 10 have II speed
~ Installed II found effective. Counsel
faH tie company earnestly insisted on
tie EaBd faith Of the efforts beingmade
b the Company to prevent 10 every
extent possible whatever inconven-
Ienee ths people OF Union Bridge
mIghI Be subjected to by the operation
n tie plant.
The application of the Company
saz vigorously resisted by Mr.. Ncant,
HIo aid the citizens of Union Bridge
had suffered great damage from the
duzI and that ample time had been
gIKsn The Company TO stop what he
claimed 10 be nuisance He con-
tended fhat nobody wanted 10 shut
down the plant. but they did insist
non N immediate trial.
= Ihe conclusion OF the argument,
Judge ForaYthe said In substance:
fhat tie question presented to the
court waa 4 very important one, as
tn interests involved were large and
affected not only the people OF Union
Bridge. but many others In the eoun-
+
That the case differed from that
presented by the ordinary indictment,
n here 10 murder or other serious
crime Ind been committed which call
u fof immediate punishment. and
tint while the comfort and conven-
Ienes 0f the people OF Union Bridge
ahunId be considered. the Court
should II the same time bear In mind
II. other important elements OF the
eaHs.
Tie Judge further said that he was
convinced Ihat the Company was bona
Iide making efforts to abate the dust.
md .hIle he did not think that he
could convince some of the people OF
Union Bridge Of this. nevertheless he
rs satisfied. from the presentation
d fhe case and the evidence submit
I'd. Ihat such was the fact. He also
aid IhaI i the plant was not TO be
closed down and the industry destroy
I'd. he did not see how the Company
could Do more than it was doing at
this tine IN its effort to prevent the
eaoape Of the dust from its plant.
The Court. therefore, granted the
application and postponed the case to
the next term of Court.
-zz=%-~-ss----