PART THREE. HE OMAHA SUNDAY BEE , PAGES 17 TO 20 ,
TWENTIETH YEAR. OMAHA , SUXDAY MOANING , OCTOBER 12 , 1890-TWENTY PAGES , NUMBER 110.
HEYMAN & DEICHES 1518-1520 Farnam Sf
BOF 1111 & Dole m 1 , , -
ti Ladies'heavy winter IT IS NO MYTH LRDIESI
Have a Larger Stock In all probability Ulsterswell , made , ser
viceable garments , no Among the cloaks arc garments
-OF- wish to remind
Every One the cloth of which
Ladies' misfits , all sound and ments can
not be procured for less than that we keep a
Misses' and of these good , in beaver , Berlin you
$ S or $ Q , yet they sell at
Children's ' twillstripes and plaids , laro'c _ 3 and well assorted
Scotch cheviots , plain , $6 and $7 stock of furs and fur
and trimmed ,
trimmings. We keep
-AKD $5 Capes and Muffs ,
$6 Boas and Collars
Will be sold within $7 of any kind or any de
Than JIousc in America.
any LRD1ES One Week $8 scription. We only
WHY ? BECAUSE
$9 keep the best qualities ,
They linvo just received from a This time or NEVER you will And no more such bargains
New York manufacturer who is
out of business will be offered. that is , do not keep any
going be able to realize YOUR $10
One Thousand. MOST SANGUINE HOPES of Here arc a few instances : inferior goods. Our
Ladies' Cloaks
, LADIES'
Five Hundred. purchasing : BARGAINS. --Cashmere Dresses prices are away below
Misses' Cloaks , Goods are almost given
T-WO Hundred away , Already ] \Iadc. \ any others. If you want
Ladies' Dresses , and $5.
- $3 , $4 to buy furs and you clo
T-WO Hundred
LADIES' ALL WOOL
Misses' Dresses , Flannel Dresses not price ours before
With the instruction to sell them
at . Tailor Made. to IS deciding , you will never
$5.00 $7,50.
$ . to $ . er know the bottom
; yea.is ,
LADIES' EXTRA 11:2
Broadcloth Dresses- prices.
$10 , $12.50 and $18 We carry other goods
It seems almost impossible besides furs and
A FEW COLORED can
Of ftafeltfre. SILK DRESSES that a dress already made afford to sell them
' can be sold for cheap , as we don't need
$10.00.
Sale GommencBS to make enough money
will be fitted $5 $6
These dresses not or on them in 3 months"
Monday ; Morning , ted by us , but we will pin them
if requested. -to last
If the goods will cost more
,
than that. year
HEYMAN & DEICHES , 1518-1520 Famam st.
ATCIIISOX & NEBRASKA DEAL
The Argument of 0. 0. Dawes in the Quo
"Warranto Proceedings.
WHY THE FRANCHISE WAS LOST.
The Combine One Designed to Itciiioro
Cciinpctltloii mill In Direct Viola-
lilt I on oP tlio Ijctter ami In
tent or the Constitution.
Following is the argument by C. 0. Dawos
for the plaintiff in the quo \wrranto proceed
ings Instituted by the state In tlio supreme
court ngnlnst tlio Atchlsoa & Nebraska rail
way company :
Tlio undisputed evidence introduced In this
casoniyl now formluis part of the record
which Is before you for consideration , shows
that from tlio year 1STJ to 1SSO the Atohlson
& Xcbr.isha railway company , formed by the
consolidation of tlio Atchison it Nebraska
railway of Kansas with the Atchlsou.Llncoln
& Columbus railway of Nebraska , operated
an Independent line of railroad from Lincoln ,
Nob. , to tlio south line of the state of NoL -
brnskii. .During this tlmo the B. & M. op-
L
crated a line of road passing through thoniid-
dlo put of the state and running through
Lincoln toPlattsmouth , ut which latter point
it made direct connections to Chicago. It
also operated during this period of time , n ,
line of road on the west of the line
of the * Atchison & Nebraska rail
road running through Lincoln , via
Crete to lleatrice , niul from tlio year Ib77
( when It leased the Nebraska railway ) to the
year l SO , It operated a line on the east of the
AtcM'oii & Nebraska railway , rumilng
through Lincoln via Nebraska City to
Ncmahn City. ThH Nuit In quo warninto Is
brought to obtain a forfeiture of such of the
f nuichises of the Atchison & Nebraska rail
way company us were formerly granted bv
thestntuof Nour.iskuto the Atchison , Lin
coln ft Columbus railway company in othei
words , tlio fninchiso for operating that part
of ttio Atchison .t Nebraska railway lying
within the state of Nebraska.
It Is charged by the state In this case that
the Atchison & Nebraska railway eoinmny ,
which , as the controller and owner of the
Atchison , Lincoln it Columbus franchises
ami the property acquired under thorn , has
assumed Its liabilities to the state , has mndo
n leoso for 009 year * to the 11 , it M , a
parallel and computing llno-thereby render-
liiK Itself liublo to lese its corporate exist
ence. On the part of the defendant it is
claimed that the Atendon & Nebraska roll
road was not a competing railroad with the
lines of the 11. it M. railroad , anil that Its
lease to tlio 13. &M. railroad was legal mid
its franchises nra therefore not subject for
forfeiture. The defendant also asserts that the
lease of this road did not result In a legit
non-user of franchise utter the date of leas
lutr.
'I'lio testimony of tlio plaintiff in regard to
the competition existing between this Atchi
BOH & Nebraska railroad and the 11 , it M , rail
way on the west , and the Nebraska rullwnj
( leased by the H , it M. railway ) on the cast
and the 11. & M. line to Chicago on the north
aad that all this competition was clostroyei
by the lease of the Atchison it Nebraska to
the 11. & M. ralwuy Is very explicit uud deli
uito.
uito.U
U ho chief witnesses for the plaintiff nro 11
I * . U. Millar , at present the genera
agent of the Missouri Pacific rail
way at Lincoln ( answer 181 , t'Ulu '
tin's ' testimony ) ; Thomas Lowery , \V B
Morrison mid Itobcrt Mitchell. Mr , Mill .r's
testimony is especially valuable. That ho
Uus110 bfiw or Icuulug towards the pluiutltT
nay bo Inferred from his present position as
irailroad employe , lie testitled that prior
to ls > sO ho wus In tno employ of the Atchlsou
& Nebraska railway at Troy Junction , at
HumlwUlt , and that ho linally became con
tracting agent at Lincoln ( answer lSr > ) the
time of his employment with this void cov
ering n period of nine years. Whllo it is evi
dent from the reading of this testimony of
Millar , that his sympathies am with the de
fendant railroad company , yet his answers
nro marked by a candor and evident sincerity
of purposes that commend thorn to special
consideration. Ho testifies that in the year
1ST9 the year prior to tlio consolidation-
more than half the shipments over the
Atohlsou & Nebraska railway , routed to
Chicago , went over tlio Iloclc Island , or over
the Hannibal & St. Joseph railways , well
known as competitor * of the Burlington
system ; and ho further states th.it the
shipments of the Atchison & Nebraska
railway wcro given to the connections of the
road at AtchUon which "could do the best
with it. " ( answer 100) ) It is true the witness
testifies that lor tlio period of a year , some
time before the consolidation , when Mr. Bar
nard was superintendent of the Atchison it
Nebraska , all tlio shipments of the road to
Chicago went over the Burlington from
Atchison ; ( answer 19T ) but ho also testilles
In answer lil.'i , that fora tlmo all the grain
shipments ol the AtchUon & Nebraska wont
over the Chicago , Uock Island & Pacific rail
road to Chicago. . And hU testimony in
answer 1'JJ Is to the effect that during the
nine years of tholiulepcndcucoof the Atchison -
son .ScNcuraska railway the tr.iflilo to Chicago
cage was about equally divided among cast-
era roads entering Atchison. In answer l' 0
ho also says that the road which "would bid
tie ) best for us would get our business. " He
uftlrms Hint the Atchlsou & Nebraska rail
road worked with any road that would give
It the best rate , ( answer iOI ! ) and says that
ho regarded the Kansas City , St. Joseph &
Council Blulfs railway , the Hannibal it St.
Joseph , the Chicago , Uock Island & Pacific
railroad and the Missouri I'ueltlo railroad
us nil in competition for the business
of hiiro.idat Atchison. ( answer 203. ) Ills
testlmonv bliows that ho traveled
along the D. & M. soliciting freight for the
Atchison & Nebraska railroad , ( answers''O'J
anil 210. ) Ho admits that it was sometimes
necessary to llguro ngnlnst the Nebraska
railway on rates ( answer ± M. ) In answer to
' " thcro ndvancein rates "
question "was nn ,
ho says : "I know s > o far as the public were
concerned that thu private rates were shut
off , ttio rebates were shut olf. " In answer
to question 237 , Inquiring on what proportion
of irclght passing over the line of the AtchIson -
Ison it Nebraska railway rebates wcro paid ,
ho says : " 1 would say that on the bulk of
the grain shipments and stock shipments and
coal shipment * and lumber shipments , there
were robats paid. " 'I'lils damaging evidence
showing that thcro was an increase of rates
after the consolidation owing to the abating
of rebates on the bulk of the shipments of
the road , caused opposing counsel immed
iately to seek to loison Its effort } by
eliciting from witness In question 230
the further statement that rebates were paid *
to only a few individuals. What difference
does It make to whom rebates wcro paid pro
vided they were paid as thowitiicss testifies ,
on the bulk of the shipments over the road I
The community received the benefit of Ulghcr
prlcoi for tholr commodities , whether the
lower rates on tha bulk of shipments cams
from rebates or through an opou rato. Com
petition among buyers , to which Mr. Utt ( in
tils testimony so often refers , und the law of
supply and demand caused the communltyto
train the benefits of the rebates for the reason
that they were paid on substantially all ship
ments off any bulk. Th ? law of supply and
demand formerly regulated railroad rales , or
what is the same thing in this instance , rail
way rebates ; but this unlawful lease ended
that by putting the commodity of eastern
transportation hi the hands of ouo corpora
tion , which theu had u monopoly.
A weak attempt is made in answers 315 , 310
and 317 of Mr. Utt's examination to impeach
the stronir , clear , testln oav of Mr. Millar ,
and Mr t'tt says in answer317 , "Ho ( Millar )
bau no pcnonut knowledge at all except tbo
c' ty of Lincoln whew ho was agent. Ho was
agent ut Lincoln , and had uo authority to
enow about the business of the Atchison &
Nebraska. " Ho may not , perhaps , nave
ought permission to know about the bust-
ess of the line for which he was agent both
it Lincoln and at Humboldt , and of which
10 was also general contracting agent ; but
Us testimony shows that ho did know this
business , mid knew it well. Ho probably
vould have lost his position if ho had not
tnouu it.
Mr. Lowery testifies directly that ho pur
chased along the lines of the Atchison & Ne
braska road at various stations , prior to the
consolidation , and that his shipments wont
east from Atchison via the Missouri I'aclfio
ailway , the Wabash , St. Louis it 1'aciflo
railway , tbo Chicago it Alton railway and
the Chicago , Uock Island & Pacific railway
answer 11) ) that all of those roads nad in ad
dition the Chicago , Burlington it Qulncy
and the central branch of tlio Union 1'aclllo
railway , wcro In competition for this busi
ness at Atchison ( inicstion It ) that ho
shipped grain to Toledo via the Wabash , St.
Louis it i'liclllc railway from the Atchison
it Nebraska line , because ho could
pot better rates ( answer 20) ) and that noun of
: his grain wont over the Chicago , Burlington
it Quincy railway unless oy accident , for tbo
reason that the Chicago. Burlington it
Qulncy railway and the Chlcagn , Kock Is-
and and Pacific were competitors , and the
Burlington road controlled the B , M. ( answer
J5) . Ho testifies that ho bought grain ut
Crete mid as far west as Fairmont , on the
line of thoH. M. railway ( answer DO and di
verted it south over the Atchison it Nebraska
because rates were- better that way than over
the B. it M. to Chicago , ( answers 31 , 32 , !
nnd3i ) In answer to question fifty-six as to
what effect the consolidation of these two
roads hud on rates Mr. Lowery testifies that
the rates were equalized and competition de
stroyed ( answer 51 and ob ) , and that rates
were raised after the consolidation ( answer
71) ) that prior to the consolidation ho used
to have a rate of 0 to 7 cents per 100 pounds
to Atchison on corn , and that [ after the con
solidation the rate was 10 cents
( answers " . " > aad 77) ) . Ho says
that ho used Port Scott coal up to the tlmo of
consolidation , but afterwards could not get
any on account of the rate charged. ( An
swer S > 7) ) .
The testimony ofV. . B. Morrison shows
that ho was engaged In the grain , stock and
coal business , and was agent of the Atchlsou
it Nebraska railroad at Hickman for seven
years prior to the consolidation ( answer "aO )
that the Atchison , t Nebraska railroad a
Hickman competed with the B. it M. at
Crete and also nt Wilbur ( answcriOO ) , anil at
Bennett and Palmyra on the Nebraska rail
way ( answer 'JUlj that ho hauled hogs and
corn from points on these latter two lines to
the line of the Atchison & Nebraska railroad ,
where ho shipped them ( answer 20.1) ) , and
that ho was notable to do so nftcr the con
solidation , because there was no computltlon
In rates ( answers -03 and 290) ) and it was im
possible to draw grain away from tuoao
roads at equal rates , Ho testified that he
handled Fort Scott coal before the consolida
tion , but not afterwards on account of the
increased rates. ( Questions iiO'J and 30U ) .
Ills cross examination materially
strengthened his testimony.
Mr. A. ( I , Bceson testifies that prior to the
consolidation , Lowery bought hogs and grain
near Crete which ho shipped south via the
Atchison tt Nebraska to Chicago ,
Uobert Mitchell tostltles that prior to the
consolidation ho bought stock from Kansas
City ( answer Mil ) , but that after the consoli
dation ho shipped nothing from that point as
the r.iUu on stock wcro raised ( answers Kill
and 5.17) ) , He testifies that the rate on cattle
from ICunsas City to Lincoln prior to the con
solidation was $ . ' 0 per car ( answer 533' ) and
that after consolidation , It was )7 per car
( unswcrMU ) .
In the determination of the fact as to
whether railway Hues are competing or not
their tranlo arrangements ami connections
with other lines , must bo taken Into consider
ation by the court ; mid in the brief of the
state In thlscaso some of the more important
cases which establish this well kuowu prin
ciple of hw are cltHi ,
it Is the contention of the state In this case
that the testimony Introduced by the defend
ant railway company is mainly Irrelevant , It
being conUucd largely to the couUlUou of the
oadbed and service Of the Atchison it No-
n-oskii railroad prior to its consolidation with
ho Burlington it Missouri Ulvcrrailway and
to oftorts to belittle the testimony of the
ilnlntilT. J
AVe will discuss this evidence of the do-
endant collaterally as two consider the general -
oral situation of the railways in this part of
ho state as regarded eastern business at the
tlmo the Atchison it Nebraska railway was
operated as an Independent lino. The tostl-
nony shows that from Lincoln the Burling
ton it Missouri Ulvcr raihoad hi Nooraska
> assed cast to Chicago via the Chicago , I5ur-
lugton & Quincy railroad. From Atchison ,
Cansas , there ran to Chicago and St. Louis
the following great lines or their immediate
connections the Chicago , Uock Island it Pa
cific railroad , the Missouri Pacific railway ,
.ho Chicago it Alton railway , the " \Vab.ish ,
St. Louis it Pacific railway , and ttio Chicago ,
Burlington it Quincy railway. Freight from
Lincoln might go to Chicago over the
Atchison it Nebraska to Atchison and to
Chicagafroni there over any ono of several
jreat trunk linos. Was it n matter of indif
ference to the Chicago , Burlington & Quincy
railroad at Lincoln whether freignt went
south over the Atchison it Nebraska rail
road 1 Uven Mr. Utt had not the audacity to
testify to this , but In answer 4..r > : ) of his cross-
examination , admits the competition at Lin
coln between the Atchison it Nebraska and
its Chicago connections at Atchison , with the
Burlington roid. That this ndmittod compe
tition for Chicago freight and other business
at Lincoln , and along the lines of said roads
within ten miles of Lincoln ( sco answer of
defendant ) , should not extend to all points in
that section of the stata equally accessible to
both lines , Is not to bo supposed , and the
ovnslvo testimony of Mr. Utt , the ono wit
ness by whom It is attempted to provo the ah-
scnco of competition , cannot stand nlono
against the testimony of Millar , ths contract-
lug ugcnt of the old Atchison w
Netjraska railway , corroborated by the
clear and explicit testimony of Lowery ,
Morrison and Mitchell , the latter three man
being shippers over the line of the Atchison
iS : Nebraska road. To such an extent was
there competition between thcso roads that
praln and hogs were hauled across the coun
try from the very line ofrtho Nebraska xiill-
way and shipped via the Atchison it Nebras
ka as testified to by Mr. Morrison , the agent
of the Atchison it Nebraska at Hickman.
There Is a disposition on the part of Mr.
Utt to demonstrate that whatever competi
tion thcro was at Atchison among tlio numer
ous roads from that point to Chicago , It did
not extend to the Una of the Atchison it Ne
braska railroad. This is simply preposterous.
The old through rate from Lincoln to Chicago
via the Atchison it Nebraska railroad was
the Atchison it Nebraska rate to Atchison
plus the rate of the connecting road to Chi
cago. The sum of these two rates would de
pend on tha rate to Chicago made by the
competing line at Atchison as much as upon
the rate over the Atchison it Nebraska road.
Unless the sum of ttieao two rates was the
same or less than the rate from Lincoln via
the Burlington & Missouri Hlver railroad
to Chicago , the Burlington it Missouri river
railroad would get the business and the
Atchison it Nebraska get nothing. Any at
tempt to provo that the Atchison it Nebraska
railroad was not Interested In gutting through
business away from the Burlington it Mis
souri river railway by making the lowest
possible rate to Chicago , Is llko attempting to
provo that the Atchison it Nebraska railroad
was run for amusement mid not for easiness.
As Mr. Millar of the Atchison & Nebraska
testifies , of the different roads that run from
Atchison to Chicago , the road that "would
bid the best for us would got our business , "
and the road that would do the best for the
Atchison it Nebraska was the ono , of course ,
which would muko the lowest rate from
Atchison to Chicago , and thereby enable the
Atchison & Nebraska to roako such a low
rate along its line as to got business away
from tbo Burlington it Missouri river rail
way , its nutund competitor.
The testimony of Mr , Phllbrlok
and of Mr. Borkoy , both nt
present omploves of the Burlington road ,
witnesses for tno defendant , seems U ) bo in
troduced mainly to show that the condition of
tha road-boil mid tru.ii service of the Atchi
son & Nebraska raliwuy , prior to consolida
tion , was not what It should have been , nor
as good as that now furnished by the Bur
lington corporation.
The testimony of Michael Denim now agent
of the B. it M. at Nebraska City , is as to the
open rates on the Nebraska railway prior to
the consolidation , and has only collateral and
inferential hearing , If any , upon the caso. In
answer " ( V ) ho directly testifies that "lie does
not know anything about the Atchison .t
Nebraska road , " Tlio testimony of Mr.A. B ,
Smith is mainly an attempt to bellttlo Mr.
Lowory's testimony by an endeavor to show
that ho did but a small amount of business
over the road.
Mr. J. E. Utt is the ono witness summoned
by the defendant in this case who testifies at
length and with any positivenoss as to rates
and the competition on the Atchison .t Ne
braska road. His testimony is to bo weighed
in tlio balance as against that of Mr , Millar
( bis fellow employe ) , Mr. Lowery , Mr.
Mitchell , Mr. Morrison and Mr. Beeson. Wo
think the testimony introduced by the state
proves conclusively that the Atchison it Ne
braska railway competed with the Burling
ton it Missouri river railway not only for tlio
local business of Lincoln and the country be
tween their respective lines , but by me.ins of
its connections , on through business to or
from this whole southeastern portion of the
stato.
stato.Vhntlmstho
\Vhntlmstho testimony of Mr. Phllbrick
ana Mr. Hot-key to the effect that the Atch
ison & Nebraska was not In as good condition
before tlio consolidation as utter to do with
the easel Has thcro been any testimony In
troduced showing tbat the business now done
over the Atchison > t Nebraska Is at present
insufficient to eiiablo Its owners to Keep It in
proper condition } Is not the section through
which it runs ono of the most
prosperous and thlcklv settled of
our state ! How otherwlso could
thcso counties carry an immense load of
bonded indebtedness which they have in
curred for the benefit of these roads I Tlio
facts iiro that the Atchison it Nebraska Is
self-supporting , and always will bons.shown
by the table of earnings Introduced bv de
fendant , and If wo nro to go outside of true
Issues in this case , wo must look nt its pres
ent condition and not at its past condition.
An attempt Is made by the defendan In tlio
introduction of testimony , to show that a decree -
creo of forfeiture will not roiult in good to
the people of this stnto. While contending
that this method of argument is entirely Ir
relevant and I in mate rial , and that the ques
tion which his court Is to decide Is upon our
laws and their enforcement , wo will yet con
sider the matter briefly. Supposing that un
der thU decree of forfelturo the Atchtson it
Nebraska railroad within the stnto of Ne
braska Is offered for sale by the stato. So
strict nro our laws against the destruction
of competition , that the Chicago , Burlington
it Qulncy railroad , or Its stockholders as In
dividuals , can bo prevented by injunction
from- purchasing it. If sold It must pass
Into the bauds of these who will operate It
Independently of the Burlington corporation ,
or It must bo operated by tno stato. Even
granting the Improbability that an independ
ent company In jwsscssion of this road would
not Immediately bjlld the forty miles of road
from the south line of the state to Atchison ,
wo contend that the Atchison it Nebraska
railroad to Palls City. In the hands of an In
dependent company , is better than the Atch
ison it Nebraska to Atchison In the hands of
the Burlington company. That part of the
AtchUon it Nebraska railroad lying within
this state , If it were an independent line ,
would have not only two alternative routes
Into Atchison , ono via the Missouri Pacific
railway at Falls City and ono via the Atch
ison & Nebraska In Kansas ; but It would
have the power of making through rates by
moans of traffic arrangements with the Mis
souri I'nclllo railway to all points south and
cast , and on the north end It would have the
power of milking tralllo arrangements not
onlv with the Burlington , but with the
Chicago it Northwestern , the Union Pacific
and the Chicago , Uot-k Island it i'aclllo rail
ways. This is upon tlio assumption that the
linn would bo cut elf from Atchison by forty
miles. Common sense Indicates that this
dUtanco would bo covered Immediately and
then the Atchison it Nebraska would again
bat'omo the competiting line for the business
of this portion of our state , uud the twtlrnouy
in this case proves it was before this unlaw
ful consolidation. Let no sophistry blind our
eyes to this fact. The enforcement of laws
designed to protect the people from the de
struction of competition between railways ,
cannot result in harm to the people. For
eight years the evidence shows' these two
roads wcro In active competition. This com
petition has been obtained at n cost to the
[ luoplo of the southeast portion of the state of
& 9r,000. as shown in this testimony , but al
though their taxes were mndo heavier on ac
count of the subsidies voted to the Atchison
it Nebraska railway , their rates of freight
were supposed to uo lighter. Suddenly rates
were raised , and by the formation of this
lease the competition for which they had
paid so heavily was destroyed. Tills is the
: aso : This section of country was lea Into
the payment of $ ; i'J7,000 of subsidies to secure
competition , but after tlio subsidies had been
secured , competition was taken away con
trary to the express words of our statutes
and of our state constitution.
A plea that no action has boon taken for
this length of time Is not an answer sufficient
to stop action in the face of such facts as
these , now that action is asked. It Is no In
dication that the people wore contented with
the lease of the road.Vo \ all know the weak
ness of such an argument for the reason that
wo all know the strength of the great corpor
ation which is attacked In this case. That
there was wide-spread protest and dissatis
faction nt the tlmo this lease was mndo Is
shown by the evidence of these shippers.
Why action was not ta.ten baforo tills time , I
care not. Perhaps it was because the
shippers lacked organisation , or because
they lacked leadership ; perhaps It was
because the power of this corporation
was such that thov recognized tlio use-
lessncss of effort. If the fact that no action
has been taken before this tlmo. plays a part
in this case , then every unpunished criminal
Is an argument In favor of crime and the abolition
lition of punishment , and every mien forced
law Is an argument against all law. An ar
gument that no beneficial results will bo
reached , and that rates will-not bo lowoted
by the forfeiture of this roail has nothing to
do with tills caso. This Is n question of law
upon which you arc to pass , not of probabili
ties ; and the argument that no action should
bo taken because It cannot wholly restore the
old competition , oven if it wore sound , would
bo against the defendant who makes it. It Is
based upon the principle that there should bo
nn Immunity from punishment for an offcnso ,
If it can bo shown that the offense has boon
committed so effectually and so completely ,
that its evil effects cannot bo eradicated.
From a legal standpoint , the moro clearly it
Is shown that by taking the action asked , the
ourt can only partially restore the loss of
competition , the creator Is It the duty of the
duty of this court to hold tnis corporation to
Its strict liability for this violation of law.
Never slnco there has existed n snpromo
court In this state has such a case boon
placed placed upon Its docket. With hut ono
determination should you approach It-tho
determination to enforce the law and to up
hold the great constitution of our Ht.-Uo. ir
wo have reacted such n point that
considerations otncr than the law and its en
forcement are to determine your notion in
this case , as is aiked by counsel of the oppo
sition , wo have reached a point when the
corporation occupies under our laws a more
favored place than thu Individual , What do-
Ikmcoof law have the men In control of this
line exhibited I What a contempt for every
intorostsavo their own ! "What rccklossncttti
of conduct ! Have the people who have paid
so heavily In bonus for thU Atchison & No-
braski railway no right to consideration ?
Mr. Wool worth tolls us of his innocent bond ,
holder * . Are the people who uro receiving
the Interest on the bonds to bo considered ,
and not the people who are paying It 1 Hero
stand * this railway corporation , pleading
for mercy before this court , and Haunt
ing In Its very face , to show Innocence
of the charge of non-usor , tin Usuo of over
51UOX.K1 ) of bonds put on thu market anil sold
in the tooth of our constitution prohibiting
such an action. Butter to have been a ilir'U
corporation than onumcrcly dead to honor ,
and alive to lawlessness. To what have wo
co no In this state when before this , its high
cat tribunal , a corporation has the audacity
to plead a misuscr of franchise in defense ol
the charge of non-user ) ,
In thcso times of commercial turmoil and
strife when men are in business conflicts ,
when the power of accumulated ami corpo
rate wealth scorns to fetter and cumber the
rights of the individual , when all over the
country wo sco combination after co nblna-
tlon designed to curb the free course1 of busi
ness and to destroy competition , In such
times a these a case like this becomes doubly
important. In your hands thcro rests the
mighty power of the people , who have valued
to such an extent the preservation of compo- .
tlon that In Its destruction this corp n-atlon
has struck at the constitution itself , tbo di
rect and expressed will of the pcoplo.and the
bulwark of their liberty.
Before you wo leave this caso.
Dr , Dlrncy cures uatarrli , 15oo 1Mgt
puniac 1'A.uics.
How They Have Increased During thQ
I iist TwentyliveTunrH. .
With the grout economic civic ini-
pt'oveincntd that have boon niiulo in the
cities of Europe and America during thq
pn&l twenly-livo years tlioro lius buon u
co rrubpouuiug development of tlio means
of popular recreation ; and this progress
has been btrikinjjly the vn in the
phtnnlng and construction of public
jKirks , says u wiitorln llarpur's Weekly.
A quarter of n century iijfo there were
but two well advanced rural parks in
the United States , now there uro moro
thuu forty , mojt of which uro fulfilling
in a largo di-greo the beneficial
purposes for which they were in-
tonued. I'hikuloliihia , with iU. Fair-
mount park of Hourly -,800auros in arou ,
Chicago , with blx parks complotul Otf
well advanced in construction ; iiroolc *
lyn , Uiillimoro , St. LouisSin : FiMiii'iauo ,
and even stmillor olticd , us New llnvun ,
Bridgeport , Albany and Buffalo , have
provided thoniaolvos with rural parka.
Now York has Hourly 5,000 acres of " land
devoted to park purposes , and "bpomla
nearly 81'J.ll,00l ) ) umiually oC the maintop
nunco und development of her narks.
AmongHuronciin cilio.4 , London , Parid-
Borltn , Uouio , Bribbuls und Liverpool
have within a fjonoratlon twlco doubled
the area of their rural rocrontion
tri-ounds. All the cities of the British
Islands tlili-ty-livo years aye po orf.scid
but four parks adapted to rurui recron
tlon ; now they contain thirty p.irkbivvoi >
ugliig ouch oOO ucros in oxtont.
So essential have publlo paries 'omo to
bo ranked in a satisfactory city hfo , that
a city doatltuto of ono stands at u com
mercial mid flniinclul dituulvanl.igo. Be
yond their great utility lit uffui-dm ; , ' u ,
means of preserving the health and huaU
nodi capacity of the urban population ,
public parka in another iispout directly
pay for tliomsolvus. Thcro is , for oxam-
plu.no doubt that tlio millions of dollar.- }
which Central park has cost No.v York :
have boon returned through th prollt
that has accrued from the altrac-tlvoiu-ba
of the city as a place of residoni'o fou
mon of means , and simply through tha
increiibod suloof real estuto which luisJ
thus occurred taxud are actually lighter
than thuy would have boon but for tha
park. _
Ur. Dlrnoy , nose and throat , Bco
Harvard btudunta have taken up the quC3 ,
tlou of Kreator library und roa ituir room ac- '
comino Jat on and huvo sutcoo | rd In rousing
the Interest of the almnnl to surh an oxfe'iiv *
tnut Its most m'j.iiliieat ur.uluutei uavu con * '
scntcd to do wfiaU vor tlu'y c.ui to aid th0
mwm < ut i'hu plan most favornl Is to
rUsi ? l > JOOO by tiiljji rlpt'.oiia ' and erect 11
b iildlnif conui' ' J hy a clujud golUry wlttt'
( Joro hall.
