Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1872-03-20
s4ss,s9s
The ateOisOn Pavement sulE.-JudE.
ment Entered al LRsb-rhs cay
% Take an Appeal.

Some days since VIC that
Hon. Judge Emmons, of the United
States circuit court, had decided the eele-
brseed paving csse Of T.. i. Brown & Co.
VS.. the city OF Memphis, in favor Of
Brown q %. The honorable Judge sus-
tanned in every psFt the report OF the
special master in the case. Mr.. A. 4
Mitchell, who had found the balance of
account against the city TO b ABOUT four
undred and ninety-six thousand dollars.
Ihis SUM had borne intsrest a. ak per
cent. from the finding OF the master, Au-
gust 1, 1871, to the present date when the
Judge decided the case, making the total
Judgment against the city about five hun
dred and fifteen Thousand dOIIsrs-not 81
hundred Thousand dollars as reported in
the papers az the time.
L VIII DO remembered By those &C.
qusint6d with the facts In the case that
q part OF the heavy Judgment sgainss the
city consisted Of the item of "damsgs"
for having failed to secure the bonds paid
to the contractors By a Sinking Fund, as
was stipulated in tie paving contract,
The contractors maintained that tbs sink
ing fund bonds, If issued to them, would
have been worth eighty-dYe cents on the
dollar, whereas, the bonds that were paid
10 them were worth only dfty CENTS on
the dollar. They claimed the difference
lth1rty-hY5 cents) as damages" and the
claim was allowed by the Master. The
Court held that the Master could have al
lowed no less on the proof before him.
Bsfore, however, the decree was entered,
the city attorney asked and obtained per-
mission TO a new testimony on the
point Of damages. This testimony
was taken before Mr.. Mitchell and re-
turned into court; and on this new tss-
timoly the court decided to reduce
the damages" and did 80 in the final de-
uEnn -hTUh uwnn nj
value Of the sinking fund bonds, which
the city had failed to deliver to the con-
tractors, was fx5d by the court at seven
ty-6ighB cents, instead of sighty-dVs
cants, as the proof ia the first case re-
quired. The total reduction in the jadg-
ment thus effected is about twenty-five
thousand dollars. The actual amount OF
the judgment, as entered in the final de-
cree yesterday, il S4SS 993, to which must
be added cas- 8,
The decision rendered by the Judge was
,oaimi lucid and able, and gave much sat
isfaotiOn 70 the city authorities, and par
ticularly the city attorney who had
fought the case 50 strsnuously. The
court was also highly complimentary to
tbs sp55ial report Of tbs master in the
case tMr. Mltohell) OF the last testimony
taken, and indicated mia purpose Gan un-
usual course) to append the masters re-
port TO his decision, TO go to the supreme
court, to which h city proposes to take
an appeal.
II We, ss cibizsns could have influence
IS advisers IN this matter, we would
strongly object to taking this case to the
supreme court. Theirs seems to be not
the shadow OF q DOUBT that the city will
have to pay the debt. Every body knows
that thedebt is justly due to Brown & Co.,
snd that it is unjust and cruel to keep
them out of thsir dues while Memphis is
clarifying herself and ~prospering in the
use of the p~sveInsnts laid by Brown &
Co. An appeal Is noe only expensive and
unjust, but It IL hazardous TO ths eity's
interest; for in the higher court We may
lose the S25. COO reduction now gained. It
IL much better to mske 81 immediate and
honorable settlement with Brown & Co.,
and cave the advantage gained. IL can
not have an honest credit until It meets
Justly its honest debts.