Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 3.djvu/730

This page needs to be proofread.

W. TJ. TBLEGRAPH 00. V. V. P. Bï. 00. 723 �Telegraph Company, wbich wonld be thereby excluded from the use of tbem for 500 or 600 miles, along wbicb tbey now enjoy that use. Tbere ia no deniai on the part of either of the defendants that tbey bad such purpose, and it is a part of the case sbown by the record, that after the granting of tbis injunction by the probate judge these parties did sever the wires as threatened, and did connect tbem or attempt to connect tbem with the American Union Telegraph Company. An application was made to the probate judge after the allowance of this order to dissolve the injunction. This being refused, the case was removed into the circuit court of the United States for the district of Kansas, and tbere an application was made to Judge Poster to dissolve the injunc- tion, wbich was overruled by him. A similar application was made to the circuit court in session before Judges McCrary ànd Poster; and in that case, wbile the presiding judge held that tbere were certain inherent defects in the contraot between the Kansas Pacifie Eailroad Company and the Western Union Telegraph Company, under wbich the latter erected its wires and was operating tbem, wbich would prob- ably authorize a dissolution of the injunction, he declined to dissolve it at the time, in order to give the plaintifF an oppor- tunity, by amended bill, to make a case wbich would remove those defects. The plaintiffs aecordingly filed an amended bill. A demurrer to the amended bill waa overruled by Judge McCrary at cbambers, whereupon defendants answered; and on that amended bill and answer, and the original papers, another application was made before Judge McCrary at cbambers, in Keokuk, for a dissolution of the injunction, and was by him set down to be beard before us at this time, in St. Louis. This application bas been beard before Judge McCrary and myself on ail the original papers in the case, the amended bill and answer, and a very large number of documents and affidavits now introduced for the first time. After a week of argument, and a very careful consideration of the case, I propose to give the resuit of that consideration in the present opinion. �The linô of telegraph wbich is the subject of the present ����