Show I HELD IN CONTEMPT ills I n Ir Court So Decides Ihe Case of the Utah 10jle Central Receifsrs TS Clark et al l 5Dpre NOT A FKAIJDULtNT ASSIfJIMrSr A SJ 1 113 Wrsltrn Hardware I air Uicldcil Irlro mo is luttAgalust ilia Niew Amrco ol UPS I 1 Clat to wJ 1 Judge lilies rendered n decision I H07 Surge today In coolmpl proceadingeof Ilia ills I the Utah Central Hallway company I Zone 0 V W 1 Clark assMant street super Judg Iorond C H IIcko wOlomlor rendetinic judgment 10 favor at the moot rodlol I at Ihi receivers The dloolal gain time ago act ly Tat log often theedvlcoof Ibo ally after rely C UI1 illy A uoy communcel tile tearlulf of the po I b railway companys track at a point tear The old Part I uglas goner 21138ji unme 10111 Central fruit company of Q i Now Yet having proviouslyablabled judgment ngatuet lite receivers cf the Slit al Ujate Utah Central Railway company and bt ct order for the sale of the property an oqof ills ci made 1 poe being enjoined and t for rtstralnoJ In the meantime from nlermejdllng with or disturbing I the i In J I blase ecelvere II having been CJ rc possession 1 S com uldd by City Attorney AoK1 debt 11 this II conditions 01 the lrocblo granted the old Bait Lake and Fort So a leadlc Jjuglas Railway company now the JUg Utah Central had been violated anti < work of tearing up the track at the otlou 1101 named was commenced when LTso he receivers obtained f temporary InJunction In-Junction citing Clark Wllcken and > n n 1 other city mploy a before Ibo court A 1 10 show Omuta why Iby should Dot be no c iunltned for contempt The bestial j alit was had before Judge Ullea on Batur o dy when Ills hall look the elms md Door dv lmol 10 wj i I rendering his decision today tbe in son court says pelllo Whilst I am eatlifle I from the evl ihe a doce that 11 respondents did nit Iry a Intend any contempt of the lawful Al ordormot thecourtsl still cannotmee no P how they can meddle with the prop y Me fly In The floods of the receivers unde without violation of the Injunctions r B II of the ccurl I may b that on a d of ohw lug such lbldDO Indicates I py the city Ad Us warrants and em BIt ploves would be able to make ou a rant lootionto tile can I t the ooul wonU I IDi ordr the track 10 Ile tote upend rom ro-m n I basin hoe bo daD In VIi Ihla I 1 case but the law requires tbal f the I all I thlngeahallf ba d 111 and Wrd jil as l a it ir e P IAd I it I a Ii tjy fj pplo tl3trs iII I 13 gull I uut b beo ad e 10 Ibo oour to tosal Ova Ills Alleged obnoxious track nday ruo od ntac I man ot the opinion that the reopen the 1 dents are lu contempt and I Is I BO ken I adjudged at 1 1 |