The Seward gateway., 1915-10-23
NEW PROPOSAL
 TO BALLAINES
ATTORNEY WEST FOR ALASKA NORTHERN WOULD APPOINT
 COMMITTEE TO SELL LOTS.

In order to prevent stagnation of the future development in the town of Seward, T. c. West, counsel for the plaintiff in the case of the Alaska Northern Railroad versus the Bal laines this morning stated in open court that without doubt this case would go to the appellate court re- gardless of the termination in the District Court, and he made a propo- sition to the counsel for the defense, that realizing the harm litigation has already brought Seward, and that which would naturally follow while the case was on appeal for the period of two or three years, he would sug gest that both parties agree to ap- point some one person, or commit tee of persons, to conduct the busi- ness of selling the property in dis pute, thereby relieving the town of Seward from the depression always following such litigation. Mir. West stated that he knew the town has suffered severely already, and his purpose in making this suggestion is to do away with that which hampers Stewards progress.
 The case of the plaintiff was closed with the introduction in evidence of the Parker contract with the Panama Railway Construction Company with the evidence given by MT. Haight yes terday afternoon.
 Mir. Haight then addressed the court and made a motion for non suit on the merits of the action, and on the further ground that the plaintiff failed to establish by proof the al legations set forth in the complaint, or to show it is entitled to any relief in the premises; that plaintiff has failed to prove the allegations of the complaint to any right or equity to the townsite of Seward, that the plaintiff has failed to prove the al legged trust in the defendants arising out of payment of the S4,000 for the Lowell relinquishment by the Panama Construction Company; that plaintiff has wholly failed to prove the allega- tions of the complaint alleging trust arose out of the alleged conversion of the $3,0O0 of the funds of the rail road; that the plaintiff has failed to prove that the Panama Construction Company was a dummy corporation of the Alaska Central Railroad; that the plaintiff failed to prove the al- legations of the breach of trust of the defendants, Ballaines, regarding their duties as officers of the Alaska Cen tral Railroad Company; that plaintiff must afirmatively show the property is necessary for railroad purposes.
 L. V. Ray also addressed the Court on this motion for non-suit, and re- viewed the testimony submitted by the plaintiff. He dwelt considerably on the evidence submitted as to the payment of the Lowell note, arguing that the same was insufficient to sub stantiate the particular allegations of the complaint. He next viewed MT. Boland's testimony, and criticized the sufficiency of the same, and the length of time elapsing before the com mencement of the action. MT. Ray argued that at the time of the re- ceivership of the Alaska Central the plaintiff through it's attorney had full knowledge of the situation and should have brought it's action at that time. The deeds introduced in evidence by counsel for plaintiff were next re- ferred to, and Mir. Ray argued that the deeds in question had been a public record for some ten years, and if they were fraudulently given the plaintiff had full knowledge of il through its attorney at that time.
 MP. West adressed the Court against the motion, and in answer to the argument of counsel for defendants