Highspire Petition Heard in court, 28Jun1902

don_ruth Member Photo

Clipped by don_ruth

Highspire Petition Heard in court, 28Jun1902 - HIGHSPIRE CASE HEARD Prtany Exceptions and...
HIGHSPIRE CASE HEARD Prtany Exceptions and Counterclaims Counterclaims Presented. TOWN LIMITS THE QUESTION Attorneys for Corporations and Individuals Individuals Bring Out Many Arguments. After numerous postponements and lelays the Highspire case was argued before Judges Simonton and. Weiss this morning. Since the first petition was presented requesting the court to make Highspire a bor ough a number of complications have arisen because of the exceptions and answers filed to and against the original papers. The argument was long and varied and at last the Court took the papers and a decision will be anxiiusly awaited. This morning Attorneys John Fox Weiss and Phillip T. Meredith, representing representing the Highspire Distillery Company Company and other property owners, argued on their exceptions to the findings of the commissioner, Paul A. Kunkel, Esq., who, dn his report, modified the lines as originally agreed upon. They also excepted to any decree which the Court might make, but on this point were told by the Court that they were in error. Their clients want borough territory to in clude all the. lines as originally asked by the petitioners, which will take in a portion of the' Pennsylvania Steel Company's land and the property of George Cumbler left out by the commissioner. commissioner. Attorneys Robert Snodgrass and W. F. Darby opposed the petition on be half of The Pennsylvania Steel Company Company and the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, presenting certain legal points and asserting that the application application for a borough charter had not been properly published. Thejr also claimed that because of the numerous improvements now in progress at great expense it would work a hardship hardship to include this property at this time. Attorneys W. M. Ilnin - , John A. Herman and D. L. KauffmaJi represented represented the petitioners, presented papers ond cited authorities tio show that the application had been prop - erlv made ana the law" . compiled - with to the letter. They intimated j that they were favorable to the faots as found by the commissioner. Mes.de D. Detweiler. Esq., appeared for 'Squire J. F. Klugh, of Highspire, the original petitioner, and asked that the original petition be granted. He argued that the land excluded by the commissioner as farm land had not been used for farming for some time and did not come within the law covering that point - lie al so argued that a greater portion of the land now occupied by the Steel Company had always been considered as a part of the village. Because of the numerous papers it will be some time before an opinion opinion from the court can be looked for.

Clipped from
  1. Harrisburg Telegraph,
  2. 28 Jun 1902, Sat,
  3. Page 1

don_ruth Member Photo
  • Highspire Petition Heard in court, 28Jun1902

    don_ruth – 15 Oct 2013

Want to comment on this Clipping? Sign up for a free account, or sign in