Omaha Daily Bee Newspaper, October 12, 1890, Page 17

PAGES 17 T0 20, oM \HA = ‘sU I) NG \l()l(\l\(-. ()(‘T()BERr 1é l‘\\'] NTY l‘A\i(iliCl NUMBER 116. "(}}'lll[lll & Deiches oIS nd 1520 Famam Street, > HEYMAN & DEICHES, 15181520 Farnam St e Ladies’ heavy winter FINTCN \T T Have a Larger Stock Inall probability Ulsters,well made, ser- I l 15 ‘\O ‘\[\ III [ LRD[BS‘ —OoF— viceable garments, no Among the cloaks are gar- | We wis ‘e & . ‘ | ¢ wish to remind Ladies’ Evel”y One misfits, all sound and | ments the cloth of which can- } | M ' 44 ( » procured for less tha ? ‘ 7 00 ¢ Misses’ and ---of these--- ; good, in beaver, Berlin | 10t be procured for less than | you that we keep a $8 or $9, yet lhk_\' sell at twill,stripes and plaids, large and well assorted | Children's o\ \\ } \ S(‘(’lt('h SRS ety Bl 6 and $7 ‘ stock of furs and fur | and trimmed, e ——— i ‘ | trimmings. We keep -—and-- DRESSES| | DREWH ill be sold within Capes and Mufk Boas and Collars e of any kind or any de- Than any Howuse in America. ]_\AD]ES 1 T . WHY? BECAUSE | i One Week scription. We only keep the best qualities ’15):?/3 ;‘;\,\kn ,J,:::,l”:,:‘("li:,i: {'\,‘l’::: & ;'l‘hi; time or NEVER you will| And no more such bargains et ; 1 4 gotng out of business T e SO will be offered. that is, do not keep any One Thousand | T ANCUINE spe ¢ Here are a few instances . . IMOST SANGUINE HOPES o o A f.aelien Cloaka, | Il e l’l]' \]“\ Lead T inferior good Our Five Hundred purchasing BARGAINS. | S g L e yrices are awayv below ; : {Cuk i 2SSEeS-- rices are away below Misses’ Cloaks, Goods are almost Cashmere Dresses N (Y { o\ 1 G SRl AR Two Hundred away. l 2 A“‘:i“)’ M“({“- B t\s ‘J () | \b any others. If you want Ladies” Dresses, s oo 3 anc 5 /! . g i Two Hundred $3, y : 5 to buy furs and you do MibSChy DI‘CSSCS, E LADI ALL WOOL : i ; With the instruction to sell them Flannel Dresses not price ours before e Tailor Made. From 12 to 18 deciding, you will nev- 5.00 to $7.50. 1 $ years er know the bottom T LADI EXTRA r¥1IT%® - > -9 } 4 B US --Broadcloth Dress prices %) mn $10,$12.50and $18 | We carry other goods / It scems almost impossible A FEW COLOI MHHUYHBUJFB SILK DRESSES $10.00. 8818 GDmmBflGBS These dresses will not be fit- Mflndau MDmmg, ted by us, but we willpinthem s Octflbar' 18“] if requested. 1608520 Forum Stret Hevman & Deiches ATCHISOY & NEBRASKA DEAL | sexs st ™ besides furs and can m.‘tl a dress alrealy made | offord to sell them can be sold for cheap, as we don’tneed ' VARIENIES $r’ i %6 | to make enough money I bo OI & on them in 3 months OD [ATEI /\'S oo | to-last--for—a -whole I\ p If the goods will cost more M A0, year, than that, HEYMAN & DEICHES, 1518-1520 Farnam St. \ferred from his present position as | know on, w s not what it should have been, nor | in this business of the o proves it was before nisuser of franchise ise of 1 employe. He testified that prior | Nebraska.” —He may uot, perhap asgood as that now furnished by the Bur- | ful consolidation. T.etno sophistry blindour | the charge of now-user! 1 1580 ho ws Irs the employ of the Atel sought permission to know about th tho Burlington & Missour | and | lington cor ion. eyes to this fact. The enforcemoent of laws | Inthesetimes of commercial turmoil and & Nebraska v Junction, at | ness of theline for which he was agent both | to efforts to belittle the testimony of the | The testimony of Michacl Deram now agent | desigued to protect the people from the de- | strife when men arein business conflic ey R amo con- | ot Lincoln and _at Humboldt, and of which | plaiutiff, s o fl]fl‘h" B. & M.t X i Cily is as to the | struction of competition between railways, | when the power of accumulated and cor 2 o By the I Ho 50 ge contracting agent; bu v scuss this evidence of the de- | open rates on the a ior to | cannot result rm to the people. K o wealth secems to fetter and eumt The Argument of 0. G Dawes in the Quo | i of his employ o ‘lu\( imony’s that |H mld[ know ;.n | fendant collate ‘..:_\- onside the G n..[v 4'un~wllulmmn. and has only collateral and | eight y I.(l -“"-\,{’ - ‘w:iv‘] Hiaea two hts of the individual, when all over the War 8 ering a period of nine years. Whileit 1sevi- | b 38, anc it we o probably | situation of the s in this part of | inferential beariv upon the case. In | roads were in active petition. This co country we see combinat combing Warranto Proceedit ering b perlod of nino yers. WhIe It 18 00 | would have lost his position if he' had not | the stato as regarded ehstern businossat tho | answerd63 ho directly tesiies that “ho docs | potition has. bean obtain Yt bkl ol AL bl e St Millar, thathis sympathies are with the de- | known i G T time the Atchison & Nebraska railway wi t know anything ‘about the Atelison & | peoploof the soutiicast portion of the state of | nessand to destroy competition,—in such dant railroad wpany, yet his ans Mr. Lowery testifies di v that he pur- | operated an inc dent line, he testi- ka road.” The testimony of Mr. A, B, | 397,000, as shown in this testimony, but a times as these asé like this be doubly WHY THE FRANCHSE WAS LOST. | arc ced by candot und cvident sincerity | chased along the lines of the Atchison & Ne- | mony shows that from Lincoln the Burling- mainly an attempt to belittle Mr. | though their taxes were made heavier on ac- | important, In your hands there rests the of purpose that commend them to special | braska road at various stations, prior to the | ton & Missourl River pairoad in Nevraska s testimony by endeavor to show | count of the subsidie: d to the Atel ity power of the peopte, who have valued consideration. o testifies that inthe year | consolidation, and that his shipments w passed cast to Chicago via the Chicago, Bur- ) did but a small amount of business | & Nebraska railwi rates of frc | to such an extent the p ation ot | 1570 —the year prior to the consolidation— | east from Atchuison vin the Missouri lington & Quincy railroad, From Atchison, | over the road. were supposed to ba Tighter. Suddenly pates | ton that in its destruction this corpor The Combine One Designed to Remove | 1o thayd half the shipments over the |railway, the Wabash, St. Louis & P S, an to Chicago and St. Louis Mr. J. B. Ut is the one witness summoned | woro rised, and by the formation of this | LS struckat the constitution itself, the dis Competition and in Direct Viola- Atchison & Nebraska railway, routed to | railway, the Chicago & Alton milway and | cir immediate | by the defendant mn this case who testifies at | Juuse the competition for which they had | rectand expressed will of the people;and the g S Chicago, weut over the Rock Island, or over | the Chicago, Rock “Island & Pacific railway and & Pa- | length and with any positiveness as to rates | paiq so heavily was destroyed. This is the | bulwark of theirliberty, lation of the Letter anc the Hannibal & Joseph railways, well | (answer 11) thatall of these roads aad in ad- | road, and the competition on the Atchison & Ne- | case: This fon of country was lea into Before you we leave this case. nt of the Constitution, known competitors of the Burlington | dition the Ch system; and he further states that the 1 the cent shipments of tho Atchison & Nebraska | Following ls thoargunent by C. U. Dawes | Fatlway were glven to the, comnections of, tho for the plalntiff in the quo warranto proceed- | 1038 81 Atchison which cou o wi braska roud. His in the balanceas g (bis fellow employc Mitchell, Mr. M to Atchison and to | think tho tes any ono of several | proves conctusi Burlington & Quincy ago & Alton 1 ch of the Union Pacific | St. Louis & Pac 1 in competition for this busi- | Burlington & Quincy i nison | (question 1i)—thiat ho | Lineoln might ko to- (i shipoed grain to Toledo via the Wabash, Atchison & Nebrask [ e e | Gl o theetey stimony is to be weighed e payment of 3307,000 of sul 5 to secure - - Batiine the paymen ! 1t ar competition, but after the subsidics had beon Dr. Birney cures catarrh, Bee bldge secured, competition was taken away con- S trary to the express words of our statutes PULLIC PARKS. and ‘of our state constitution, e introduc v'that the o Atchison & Ne- fngzs instituted by the state in the supreme | tostifics that for the period of a year, some | & Nebraska lme, because ho could | great trunk lines. Was it a matter of indif- competea with tho Burling. | iy ok, ghab no action {:\lml\"\“\”‘l\fzinu,‘f,"‘ How They Have Increased During the courtagainst the Atchison & Nebraska rail- | time before the consolidation, when Mr. Bar- | get better rates (ansyer 20) and that none of | ference to the Chicago, Burl river railway not only for the |t stop action in the face of such facts Last Twenty-five Ye way company : nard was superiutendent of the Atchison & | this grain went over the G Bur railroad at Lincoln wiether fr Jocal business of Lineoln aid the countey b Ll ; such facts as ~|\.| all the shipments of the road to | & Quincy railway unless by acc south over these, now that action is asked. It is no in- With the momic ic ime 1 their e WTho undisputed evidence introduced in this RIS, SN R Lt ithar Ghlc SN ot b respective Lines, but by means of | dication that the people were contented with | provements th been made in the casead now forming part of the record r 107) but he r and the Chic Roclk testify to this, but in answ 3 of his cross- n this whole southeastern portion of the the loaso of the road. Vo alllknow/he v cities of Lurope and An Lducing the ness of such an we all know the st ation which is att 1ment for the hoof the g d in this which is before you for consideration, shows land and Pacit that from the year 1872 to 180 the Atchison C v that fora tim and > Atchi » competitors, examination, admits the competition at Lin- | stat coln between the Atchison & Neb A and What has the testimony of Mr. Philbrick its Chicago connections at Ate n that | past twenty-tive years o hi av corpor- | eo rresponding development of the m wse. That n a Burlington road controlled the B, M. . He it ifies that he b Ans 8 B ¥ 4 son, with the | and Mr, Berkey tothe effect that the Ateh- B Y e of popul and this & Nebraska raltway company, formed by the imony in te and s far w rmont, Butlington road. That this admitted compe- | ison & N a wis not fu as good condition | fhoti > wide.spread protest and dissatis- i liomatin ccnsalidntion of 1ho" Aohisos: & Nebrask ing the vof the B, M tition f sight and other bu before the on e fioosotlition | faction at the timo this loase SR fhio o railway of Kansas with the Atchisc neoln A\[ hi ed it south oy P ¢ ines of said the case! Has any testimony in by th ‘A\I. nce "'. h pers, | b o hing i 1‘1” 1 ol ‘n].lu_; & Columbus railway of Nebraska, operated to Chi- | because rates we within ten miles of Lincoln (see answer of | Vlwhlm me L the by s now done ion ‘I‘,‘{”“;'”_w*:" ) ::l" : this time, I I'\“ “H : .-‘ L ELATD \”-v & \_,». an iudependent line of railroad from Lincoln, | €350 Was about 1z cast- | the B. & M. to Chic r defendant), should 1 toall points in Atehison & Nebraska is at present AR SWssbaguse ihe | &gl atury ago thero weie ! S roads cuter answer 190 | and 34) In answer to question fifty-Six as to | that section of tt scessible to Bt L s e e lization, or because \.m two vanced rural parks in Neb, to the south lino of tho stato of Ne swould bid at effect the consolidation of these two | both lines, s not to 1,and the | proper condition? Is not the section through | I eraans. u Yak|lithe Tnit 5, now there are more o braska. During this timo tho B. & M. op- | st forus would usiness.” He \ds had on rates Mr. ¢ testities thut | evasive testimon Mr. Utt, the one wit- | which it rubs one of most el Cecsparatlons|ithan for ich are fulfilling erated a line of road passing through the 1t the Ateh & D 3 were wpetition de- | ness by whom it is attempted to prove the ab- | us and t settied of | V43 at thoy rocognizod tho use- | i tha benufatal IR ot thor R RtRT Al o ey 1 that d (answer andthat rates { sence of comy cannot stand a | statel How rerwi couly [ Rann fe padkh i I8 L ERAVIIORMOR [y e AR Lincoln to Platt th, at which latter point , (unswer 201) and re raised af » consolidation r inst the test Millar, ths contr | counties cal an_immense load of | M3 been taken before this time ‘,.m\ v part | PIEIEOY A P AR PTR L4 A QYIS AR AR POND | St. Josoph & | that pr the_consolidation agent o old 'Atchiso | bonded indebtedness which they have in- | i thi 0 eyary unpuiishiedic |ttt i) sl it mado” direct connections to Chicago. It lanuibal & St. | arate of 6 to 7 cents p. cyraska railway, corrobor 1 for the benofit of the is an argument in favor of crime and the a mount park also operated during period of Island & Pacific | hison on corn, and that fafter the olear and expliclt testimony ts are that the 1 of punishment, and every unen fore Chicago, line of road on the west of the y ri Pacitie railroad ion tho rate wils 10 cents rrison and Mitchel supporting, | s an argument against all law. An well adva 1 in of the SAtchison & Nebraska mail- | compe for the b s 5 H: aad 7). He s shippers over t y the table of | t that no 1l result lyn, Baltimore, S 205.) His and that rates of his road at Atchison, (answer ‘ort Scott coal up to the time road ruming through Lincon, via | cbraska road. fondant, and if ks red | i, even s 3 doatrice, ¢ . testing shows that he trave ation, but afterwards could not tition betwe 0 roads that | issues in this cas its pres- | DY the forfeiture of this road has nothing to | 3ridreport Creto to Doatyioe, fad Trom the year T | wiong tha B, & M. Soliditing freight for the | any on ‘ieeduat of e xato oharged. (An- | grain aud hogs wers bauled uctoss the cout | ent condition aud ot at its pas foh " | do with this case. This s a question of law | e Ut s BT, O o 1t eoorted A e o the ) tothe | Atchlson & Nebraska railr swer g | try from the very line of ka | "An attempt is made by the defendan in the on Which you are to pass, not of probabili- | 1 /i’ e SR o i“' Ahiton " sk o cast OFthe | und210.) “He adwits that it was sometimes The testimony of W. B, Mo shows | way and shiy via the Atchison & Nebras- | introduction of testimo: ) show that a de argument that no ac 11d | AW 1Ok has nee 5,000 acres of land o~ A e B ARl 3 Py to figure ogainst the Nebraska | thuthe was engiged in the grain, stock and 1s tostified to by Mr., Morrison, the agent | cree of forfeiture will not result in good to | ¢ wse it cannot wholly restore the | devoted to park — purposes, and “spendg 2 P A AN e R o Ou rat Tnanswer to | coal busi and was agent of the Atchison Atchison & Neoraska at Hickman the people of this state. While con | 01 competition, even if it were sound, would | nearly $1,250,000 annually of the mainte; e iy R L ‘jl'fi"“‘j;””‘j question ws there ancein rates,” | & Nebr vailroad at_Hickman for Thero is o disposition on the part of Mr. | that this method of argument is entirely ir- | D¢ dzainst the defendant who makes it. Itis | nance and development’ of her parics, S O e A veriton & ch Oftho | Lo siys: I kmow 50 far s the public were | years prior to the consolidition (ausw Utt to demonstrate that whateve peti- | ant and immaterial, and that the ques- | Dased upon the principlo that Amor cities, London, Paris. PRy COmpany 68 were for antod b concerned that the private rates were sh that the Atchison & Nebraska railroad a | tion there was at Atehison amon, | tion which ‘his court is to decide is upon our | A8 HOM m punishur Berlin, Brussels and crpoo ‘;'_ ‘,"“}"‘r"\ O tn s 3 ‘\ oV '3 wer of.” In answer | an Co the B. & M. at | ous roads from that point to Chic laws and their enforcement, we will yet con- | I it ¢ 1 ¢ Bl the state of Newruska o tho son, Lin- on what proportion | Crete and al n 200), and at | not extend to the line of the Atehison & Ne- | sider the matter briefly, Supposing that un AL BN gonearation twice doubled SORELRAIRIIN Ty ¢ AR OMAE | g s line of the Atch- | Beunett and Palmyva on the Nebraska rail- | braska railvoad. This is simply preposterous. | der this decree of forfeiture the Atehi | the arcu of ti rural - rocroation MR tho rancise £ ADAL [are 1 & Nebraska railw ates were paid, | way ( 1) that he hauled hogs and | The ol d through rate \Lincoln to Chicago | Nebraska railroad within the state Ne- | more ¢ nds, All the cities of the British "_m‘;“ TR v ay ing ys: “Lwould say thaton the bulk of | corn from poiuts on these latter two I & braska railroad was | braskais offered for sale by the state. So stion as nds thirty-five years od b { e e this caso thag | the rain shipmeats und stock shipnents and | tt » of the Atchison & Neb: f Nebraska rato to Ateh strict are our laws against th truction 1 the loss of | but four parks adapted to Kbas the Atc l'mf“ % Nebraska railway compiny, | €03l shipments and - mber shipments, there | where he shipped them (ans #), and pm\ the rate of the connecting road to Chi- | of competition, that the Chicago, Burlington | comnetiti iter 18 it the duty of the | tion; now they contain thirty parissaveus - which, as the oontraller and. owWno: m‘ the rebats paid.” Tuis damaging evidence | thathe was notableto do so after the con. The sum of these two rates would de- | & Quincy railroad, or its sto asin- | of this court to hold tni iy Sl AYa: 1o Akt e Atchison, Lincoln & Columbus franchises Wis an inerease solidation, because t mpetition | on the rate to Chicago made by the | dividuals, can be preve ction | t lability for this violation of | tial ha publio 4 iaa e :'\Tm‘:-“r”‘f 00 aa ;‘.Iu:h;h' i l‘(b\’i""lf' | the road, caused roads atequal ied that | Unless the sum of these two uder » Burlin ¢ | 1 upon its docket. With but one | & €ity destitute of one staiids at w coms 1 N 2 m‘;.l-“.: s i L l_‘-hmff | iately to scek t handled Fort Scott coal befor 4 orless than the rate fro. ated by the state. approach it—the | mercial and ful disadvan R aalt LIABl (e Mo s oimiraia cars | © "n'h from witness n question 2 | tion, but uot. afterwards on | the Burlington & Missouri Rive | grantd vand to up. | yond their i oy ence, On the part of the defendant it is | too s arer St hat roba Tanvase d rates, (Questions ), the Burliug 0 & Missc ent com r state. If | means of pr rtho health claimed that tho Atchison & Nebraska rail sk o, ANy Fould- Apv- (0" husuieay i not 1. | point that | ness ca urban populati road was not & competing railroad with the ] L A hPaiiR BOhTAMIIAR: ALY 8t=i| WO0 b ! - | pub aspect direc i linesof the B, & M. rilroad, and that its | on the bulk of ht hogs and grain | "iot interestod it athraugh | ralinosd | pay fo Thore 1%, for oxame 5010 the BB, & M. ruilroad was leg T'he community n vhich he shipped south via the from the Bu 1 & Mis- | dependent compa pic, no doubt that the millions of dollars . hises are therefore not subj | prices for their Atchison & Nebraska to Chicago, | ilway by making the lowest | ison & Nebraska to of o | which Central park has cost New York forleiture, The defendant also asserts that the | tes on the Robert Mitc fes that prior to tho | to Chivago, is like attempting to | the Burli ¢ | nore ned through thoe proflt lease of this road did not result in a leg from rebates or thr r C consolidation ele from Kansas | prove tha : % Atch W SINUAN Vi3 RER nou-user of frauchise after the date of leas- | petition buyers, to. which Mr. Utt fin [ City (ansy t that after the consoli- | was run for amusen this - | 3007Y0G. 2r0m LD BEIFY ot $ed ing. [ his ustix and the law of | om that pointas | As Mr Millar of would have n city usu place of resldence fop "o testimony of the plaintift in regard to | raised wers 530 | testifies, of the difforent r ) Atchis : means, and simply through the the competition existing between this Atchi- | ) | tifles that the rate on cattle | Atchison to Chicago, the road that *'w railway at Fal ° sl which hag son & Nebraska railroad and the B. & M. rail- | paid on substautially all s | to Linceln prior to the con- | bid the bost for us would get our by & esare actually lighten way on the west, and the Nebraska railway | The law of su 5 820 por car (ans §) and | aud the road that would do the | | 1 Id have been but for the (leised by the B, & M. railway) on the cast, | demaad fo 1 railroad r ¢ | that aft ation, it was §27 per car | Atehison & Nebraska was the one, of | and the B. & M. line to Chicago on the north, | what is the samo thing in this instance, . | (unswer | Which would make the lowest 4 W sud that all this competition was destroyed | way rebates; but this unlawful lease In the determination of the fact to | 2 [ ), reby € 1 I 1 by the lease of the Atchison & Nebraski to | that by putting the comn of ¢ her ra » competing | X i Dr. Birney, nose and throat, Bee bldg, s :.l:v‘.“ & M. ralway is very explicit 1 defi- | transportation i the | [ ‘ traf 1 connections bus! P | A Pt . " 0. tion, which then had u mou opol; | Hthe into consider- 0 or T4l ude 1 up the quesg; , Thie chlet witnosses for the plaintiff are R S v e i g » | ation by th ; aud in brief of the i Mree, T s PP o) P. It Millan et present o goucral | A Weak sttewpt 1s made n answers 315 810 | giqto in this case some of the more important Philbrick | 48 roustng agent of tho Missouri Pacific rail- [ and 817 of Mr. Utt's examination to impeach | cases which establish this well known priu- | th et : DAL AUGH 41 ORIEnY way at Liowln (answer 184, plain- | the strong, clear, testimony _of Mr. Millar, | ciple o e ] ent employes R, 4 have cone tifs tesuwony); Thomas Lowery, W. B. | and Mr. Utl says in answer317, “He (Millar] | it is the contenticn of the state in this caso | es for the defendant 0 boin. 1 g A ald the Morrison and Hobert Mitehell, = Mt Millir's | had no personal kn owledgo at all except the | that the testimony introduced by the defend: | 1 mainly toshow that the condition of | th Atehis B i Faeane Yo Lonah | 28 ik iy favored is tostimony is speclally valuable bt he | eity of Lincoin whoro bo'wes st Ho was | ant ratlvay conpiny is. mainly irrelevant, i I-bed and train service of tue Atchi- | becomo the competitin e | e Al i 10 WO | FSL RN 0 17 SEVOELBHORS NS 40 bias or leaning towurds the plantie l agent @t Lincoln, aud had wo suthority to | being confined largely to the couditiou of the | son & Nebraska railway, prior to consolida- l of this portion of vur stute, aud the u d idin iy y @ closed gallery wil 4 ¢ hall, mony lm tribunal, @ corporation has the' audacity | G | i