| Show 1 j I M ECCLES I MAKES DENIAL DENIA I Disclaims In Damage Suit I Any Promises for far farI Erecting Factory I I II IAn I An emphatic denial to the kati- kati I mony Of ot John F r Shelley pi- pi pl 11 In- In tiff in th the tho damage suit I brought against 3 1 M H and L 1 n It i was mad In lii the feil It I court In Ogden this morn In Joseph Joseph it M ono one on of the tho d de defendant In the th action Th The ea case I is being tried before Judge nh Tin Tinman man juan L D Johnson Johnon and a jury In answer to the tho th oe oral put to him by his as to whether hether he ho did at t any Rny tim time 1 advise th the tho plaintiff tha th- th h h- h had le- le elded upon a site It for tor th the tho 1 augat factory or that the was to be b built at the th Ju Pug Just Junt t Rich muir-Rich site alt or that he made mado a 0 trip over Ur Ule territory nith Ith v the th plaintiff promised to help m mate mate- mate materially t- t In the construction of a abridge bridge bride over the th Snake river build i a hat hatS haid d surface road In the tho th district or or take taJ tak 0 steps for tor the th building of ofa oa I n a railroad spur Mr Eccles re replied re- re plied I I moat certainly did not I nev ne- never nc- nc er Cr had any such uch conversation a at any time or any place D BICKS VT VP BROTHER Mr Cede also aIRo denied that he had told John J Bennett that he dId nt enre cir cr ho how man many other cnn cnn- com companies pans panics built factories In the dIs- dIs dIstrIct dig dig- dis district his company would build a factory at the Just Just Juat sIte Mr who took tok tho the wit witness nit nit- ness nes stand oland tand lat late Tuesday afternoon corre corroborated th the testimony of his brother r L I I R It Bodes that Tho Thos W Shelley approached thom them r rIO rIO- re regarding garding the th building building- of a factory t at Shelley Ida Iela Id He H told of i isit 1 St made to Ogden by T W SI-ehley SI In which Shelly Shelley sakeS for or a writ writ- written written writ written ten agreement re regarding the th foe foe- factory fac factory tory because he h said laid the th Utah Utah- Utah Idaho Idaho Sugar Bucar compAny cm any wa we wao coming i Into the tho district and an he h could get getan I an agreement ment from that company I Th The witness ss said h he replied that he nag no acting In rood good faith but w ne e eho base hav ho gettin 10 had sm some difficulty In tine let get get- gettine tin tine tOll together ether r The Th te testified that In va- va various va various rou rious conversations and nd catIon between tw n him Ira Im and nd T W IV Shelley y Mr Ir Shelley v had pointed out the t Left n and axi Hubble sites i and Uld d suitable location for f r the th pro pro- proposed posed factory irr n- n Eccle Eceles w a on the th stand when court adjourned at the th noon recess OASE SE NEARLY EARDY OVER OTER L I R It Eccles who wa woe on th the witness stand th the greater sat r part of Tuesday said ald ho he h was as never neTT a a parts to any contract to build a factory but went nt to a ai as a disinter disinter- disinterested ested party for the th purpose of Cf I as- as as elating Mr Cr Shelley and nd his hi asso elates aso-elates elate In la locating a otte alte itt for the th proposed factory The Th case cage which opened In the th court curt a II v week neck ago may my go co to the th jury tomorrow |
