604 FEDERAL REPORTER. �the rule each party filed a second answer. These answers do not deny the statements of the affidavit of Mr. Weir touch- ing the above-mentioned transactions of July Ist and 2d, nor as to the def endant's mode of charging the Adams and Amer- ican Express Companies local freight rates on such express matter carried past Greencastle from and to points south, and to and from points north, of that place. On the contrary, these matters may be said to be admitted. �Numerous affidavits were read upon both sides, but as to the material matters of facts contained in them there is no very important çonflict. �It was admitted by each party cited, except A. C. Cowk, that he had knowledge of the injunction order on and prior to the transaction mentioned in the affidavit of L. G. Weir. �After the raiiroad company had refused to receive on board its cars the express company's safes and chests, on the first and second days of July, the former's president modified his demand as to the terms upon which the express company would be allowed to continue its business over the defendant's road, to the extent that, instead of a personal examination of the contents of the safes and chests, the express company might furnish a written list or inyentory of them, and pay the defendant freight at its local schedule rates upon each parcel, instead of upon the aggregate weight of the safes and chests, and the packed parcels therein ; the defendant reserv- ing, however, the right to open the safes and chests, and in- spect their contents, whenever it saw fit to do so. It is in- sisted that Mr. Gaither, the express company's manager, agreed to or acquiesced in the terms embraced in this modified demand, but the proof shows the contrary, Instead of con- senting and acquiescing, as claimed by counsel for the defend- ant, Mr. Gaither submitted to the terms exacted, fearing that only a temporary interruption of his company's business would be fatal, so far as this line of road was concerned. It is urged that the terms imposed upon the express company as conditions upon which it might continue its express busi- ness OYer this line of road are reasonable and lawful, and not in violation of the order of the court. ����
