Show SUGAR B BATTLE FO FOR R 7 ON IN COURT Counsel for Defense Starts i r h i for Judg- Judg Without out Hearing of or H- H Evidence in in Controversy Td Trial l of or the suit Instituted by the West AVest cst Cache Sugar company compan ag against J. J JJ and anil Lorenzo X N. Stohl I 1 t to recover u h alleged 1 to 1 have ha be been n aUN irum mu L of 4 the llie company compan and damages ld to to h have c been sustained b by the plaintiff company In its business standIng stand- stand In Ing and efficiency from th the liC alleged d ac- ac o of the defendants was w he begun un in inthe S the Third district court y bo- bo fore rore Judge William Illiam H. H Bramel A A motion b by Attorney E. E A. A Wed wood of or counsel for or the defense was wase J e made nde following presentation of oL the tho pleadings on the c case e. e ThIs motion masked n for a Judgment on the pleadings submission of or the evidence c had not completed his ar u- u on the motion when court ad adjourned ad- ad at 5 S Tho The he hearing will oS resume at 10 o'clock this morning The basis of oC the argument was WS a corpora corporation t Iou Is buu bound nd h by hy Ila H charter c against l tile the pros prosecution of ot su a suit Slut tiit ius as Is herein Involved ol 4 Mr Air Wedgwood ed wood contended that hat the deal whereby 1 the factory of the I Knight Sugar u ugar al' al company to together ether with j the contract con- con tract for lor its removal to lo Cache valley I made with the Lynch-Cannon Lynch II were sold to the West st che Sugar Hug company compan- at an alleged cd to and over rr the tIc cost It fl of or the tho r factory and contract w. w covered cO b by the thc articles of oC ra Xo Wrong ron t. t I inclusion he tie averred of he the I of oC the thc deal eal in the articles 4 of In- In 2 Corporation binds the company under J l charter from tiny repudiation of oC the transaction tran and antI he explained that th the 1111 of or this suit tiit must be eon con dd a a. r repudiation I I n 3 admitting a i wrol rul feature to the transaction said ald in hi his opinion this liis must hold ite He sai said statement t not he be construct to that hat lie 10 was admitting an any wron wrongful ut feature in transaction During the pre presentations of IC the tho s IJ by counsel for or both sides which occupied the whole of oC the tile forc forc- an informal protest in or order er that th the court might bo Io on In tho the subject it was waN said ald was mado matIo b by A Attorney Attorney At At- t- t torney torne Richard W. W Young Jr of ot counsel coun sd sel for the defendants against ag an ad- ad made by the plaintiff company compan In Iii Its answer to the amended answer o of the defendants to the complaint complaint- A Attorney rn e. e I Frank Z E. E HolD couns counsel n for tile the against ma claim made mado b by counsel for Cor tile the defendants deter defend ants to the court that the admission was improper as asserting that thai the point In question had been ruled upon by another division of oC tho the Third district I court a a. week a ago o Court Smile Attorney Young Toung explained that his purpose was merely to acquaint the tho court with the fact that the defendants did not subscribe to the tile admission and that It was designed b by the plaintiff to put words Into the thc mouths of th the defendants which they never ne intended I fl saying The court smiled at al this al ci- ci l- l legation The first paragraph raph of oC the amended answer of the plaintiffs plaintiffs' amended an answer answer answer an- an to the Iho defendants which the said admission of ot the plaintiffs plaintiff's reply to the tho amended answer II is based reads That they admit that the defendant is a corporation cor cor- as alleged in tho the first paragraph paragraph para para- graph of ot the complaint Claim alm Two ProJects Project Attorney Young explained that the tili defendants claim that th tho money aie al alleged al- al e ed to have been collected for stock subscriptions Jbf ws all returned to the subscribers the plans to build a.- a. at nt Smithfield were abandoned abandoned aban aban- and that the tho pre present ent West st Cache Cathe Sugar Hugar company compan at Cornish was the re- re milt Hult of Qt a later instituted enterprise A motion notton to strike the offending a admission Ion sion was yas overruled a week ago after ater argument had been ma made by coun counsel el for the defendants Counsel for tor the plaintiff submitted I Ithe the question without argument I Counsel in the tho case for tor the plaintiff 1 includes the firm of or Cheney Chency Jensen and antI for the d defendant Young Ai Young roun Thurman I Irvine Irvino 1 no and anti Thomas Marioneaux The Thc latter became be came associated in the case yesterday morning |