Alpena weekly argus. [volume] (Alpena, Mich.) 1871-1893, 1878-04-03


: BILE TO incur of 1920 with a pos.
sible addition of $50 in each case,
J aud that all twelve of said cases
would have to be appealed, his
position is not warranted by the
J facts, and it seems to me he intends
to mislead, and makes the state
} ments he did for buncombe merely,
and not for the purposes of justice.
When | was retained to assist
the City Attorney in said cases by
the Council, last October, l inform
ed them that the chances were even
that the case might be decided
against the city and if such should
he so, / Thought thar the ease should
be taken tn the Supreme Court.
That the amount involved was
large, and the taxpayers interest
ed. and the city ought not to pay
the same until the Supreme Court
had passed upon the case, and held
that the city was liable, and it was
my understanding at that time,
that the city would appeal to the
SUPP eme Court, if the case was de-
rided against il, and | had no
thought after that hut what that
would he the action of the Council.
Had l known or supposed there
had been any change in the views
of the members of the Council |
should have been present at the
meeting at which the compromise
and settlement was made, and |
should then have made the same
proposition | afterwards made, in
regard to appealing said case, as l .
had Informed the Mayor before ]
that time, in discussing the proba-
bile costs to the city in appeal, that
in case Judge Tuttle's decision
should be affirmed 10y the Supreme
Court, | would charge nothing for
my services in the Supreme Court,
as | was very anxious to see the
points raised in said case, some of
which were new, passed upon by
the Supreme Court, and the Mayor
expressed his views, :hat said case
should lie appealed. Mr.. Turnbull
is wrong again, when he says it
was ten or fifteen days after the ,
decision was made before the first
meeting of the Council. The de-
:ision was made and filed on the
18th, and the Council met on the
18th of February, and during that
line | was not out of the city, or on
he evening of the 18th, hid away,
put that evening Mrs. Holmes and
myself attended the prayer meet =
ng at the Baptist Church, and the
'fficer would have found me there. :,
No member of the Council, except Il
he Mayor, ever said word to me r
bout the matter. | was assured ,
~ the City Attorney that, ia his
Judgment, there was no question \
bout the Council directing the
ase to he appealed. and l gave it
70 further thought, and did not n
earn Of the action of the Council n
ntil ] saw their proceedings as III
ublished. H
Mr.. Turnbulps proposition in re-
ard to taking those cases now to
ne Supreme Court, is as one sided
nd unfair, as is his whole article,
nd, in my judgment, is made for n,
uncombe and effect. Having 81 Sc
DO to start on, he does not pro- =.
ose, in case the Supreme Court .
oversees Judge Tuttle's decision
I'd hold that the City was not La =
e, to pay back into the city treas
ry, what that reversal would say
is clients had no right to take in =,
he first place, or in equity to keep, N
ut he would pay only $1,000 to
'e city, and the city would be ont r.
either event, according to his
$1,000, and as his
tents have already $4,000, paid ~
7 the city in settlement, they Y
ould really lose nothing, if the II
se should be reversed. / made RI
y proposition in regard to the APP n
al of said case, to the Council in p 0
'od faith, and l will make anoth- AL
to Mr.. Turnbull, which l will ''
bmit to the public to Judge wheth- -
it is fair or not, and to Judge be- Pl
zen his proposition and mine, per
d which is in favor of justice NJ
d the more equitable of the two. Il,
Now, Mr.. Turnbull, if you are -,
xious to see this matter settled ~
the Supreme Court, l make you =,
Is proposition. We will take the UI
'nton case, decided by Judge w
title, settle bill of exceptions, t q.
the case now stands, in accor- az
nee with the practice, and take i re-;
d case, upon said bill, to the Su- -
'me Court. You to give bonds n
the city, in the sum of $4,000, u
,ditioned to pay back or to re- t!
n into the city treasury, either Sew
orders issued by the city to shut shut
IT clients, in settlement of said str,
is, amounting to $4,000, or if to s
y have been paid by the city, MI
N that sum in money, and to ~
the costs of appeal in the Su- "
me Court, in case Judge Tut % F',pn
$ decision is reversed. to give Man
IDS to the city, in the sum of oe
70, conditioned to pay all costs ~ a..