St. Charles City Republican intelligencer. [volume] (St. Charles City [Charles City], Iowa) 1857-1861, 1857-10-29
81. Charles City, Iowa, Oct, 90, 1857.
Court House Controversy.

court House controversy.
This proceeding elected eonsidera-
bic interest at the last term Of the
District Court in this county. 1t ap-
pears from the records Of the County
Judges Office, of this county, that Ira
Bracket entered into all agreement
with Floyd County, by contract dated
November esth, 1856, binding himself
to build all the stone-mason work of a
court house, according to certain spe-
ci6cations, for the snm of s7284, and
in addition to be paid sl6 per tun for
the joist aud s25 per NJ for the stay
lathing, which was TO be furnished by
him; the same to be completed by the
LIST of September. 1885,. Mr. Bracket
sitter completing his contract as spec
fled, asks the County Judge to audit
his claim for the balance part having
been paid due him on the contract
and issue warrants therefor. Tue
County Judge refusing toallow or dis
allow the claim, or to do anything In
the premises, Mr.. Bracket filed his
petition in the District Court, alleging
that he had performed his part of the
contract, and that there was a bal
ance Of $24ss 81 due him from the
County, and asking that a writ OF
mandamus be issued to compel the
County Judge to audit his claim and
draw warrants therefor. The writ
having been issued and served, the
following is the opinion Of the court
in tho proceedings:
MANDAMUS
State Of Lsra on relation Of Ira Brak-
at Is. County Judge Of Floyd Coantv,
This is an information on the part
Of the r~elstor. asking and praying this
Court to grant an Alternative Writ Of
Mandan1us directing the County Judge
ofsaid county to audit certain claims
which the relator alleges is due him
from said county BY virtue Of GER
tain contract to perform work for said
county; which contract is attached
to said information, and made rart
thereof, and which alternative writ
has been issued accordingly, direct
ing said County Judge to proceed as
therein directed ct to appear forth
With and show cause why he has not
done 20. 70 all Of which proceeding
the said County Judge comes into
court ANA demnrs and shows unto
the Court the following causes for de-
murer:
Fs,st-" The relatcr has q plain,
speedy and adequate remedy at law"
Saoed-"The relatcr does not show
himself to have performed the con-
tract within the time in said contract
set forth, nor does he allege q full
performance on his part"
The third cause We understand is
Withdrawn,
The first question then fer this
court to determine is whether the re-
lator has a plain, speedy and adequate
remedy at law or not; for it is plain
that this writ should never be resorted
to where it appears such plain, speedy
and adequate remedy exists. In or.
der to determine this qnesti ion we
must look at the contract for a mo-
ment and ascertain if we can, what in
Jury has been inflicted; what rights
have been withheld from the relator
that call forth from this court the ex-
ercise Of this mandatory power. By
such contract then, it appears that the
County Judge of said county, con
tracing on the part Of his county,
and for the use Of his county, on a GER
tain day therein named, and this rela.
tor, made their covenants and agree
ments m writing, by terms of which,
this relator bound himself to erect a
court house, on certain lots, in the city
of st. Charles, in said county, accor-
ding to certain specifications therein
named or referred to; all of which
this relator alleges he has done and
performed according to the terms Of
his said covenants and agreements on
his part, and that he requested and
demanded of the said County Judge.
as the accounting officer of his county,
to audit and allow his account which
appears by terms Of said contract to be
due him from said county, in the Or
Indebtedness of said county,
as is specified in said contract, which
service and duty the County Judge.
as he alleges, refused to do and per.
form on his part, according to his
agreement.
In answer thereto, the County
Judge comes into court and admits
in the onset that the facts and allega.
tons as set forth by %relator, are
true; that the ~relator is entitled to his
pay upon said contract; and that
is claimed is Justly due to
the ~relator, that he ought to have his
contract performed on the part Of said
county; but says that he will not per.
!orm on his part or on the part
y the county for the reason that
his relator has taken the wrong
,ourse to make him do it, or to make
lin perform that which be acknowl.
'dgss himself to be just, to be right
nd proper, and which he notwith.
standing, refuses to perform.
The County Judge is the accounting
&cer Of his county, and it's fiscal
gent, and through him as snch agent
My can the Treasury of his county
% reached, and the county be
compelled to pay it's just debts when
.wfully contracted, and whenever as
: appears in this case, claims against
ne county are just and right, it is
Hearty the duty Of the County Judge
o audit such claims immediateIyt
without p~atting the claimant to ex-
'ense and trouble, and compelling
i'm to resort to any measure whatey.
= to obtain what is admitted To he
lis just dues. This is clearly a dutv