The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1882-04-13
THOSE JACKSON TOWNSHIP BONDS.
A Tax-Payer Criticises the Action of the
County Commissioners

A Tax-Payer CrIticises the Action of the
County Commissioners
EDTToRs NEWS: On Saturday last
the board of county commissioners were
hastily called together, and when they
met, acted on a matter of the most vital
! Importance to the voters of jackson
township without due deliberation. II
appears that for several days prior 10
the said meeting of the board, parties in
the interest of Neosho Rapids had been
soliciting names to a petition requesting
the board 10 submit second PROPOSE
ton to vote bonds of that township to
the extent of $25, 900 for the benefit of
the Kansas City & Emporia railroad,
and among the most active in soliciting
these names was the member of the
board from the Rapids.
On Saturday morning, of the day the
commissioners met, it seems that this
same interested member from the Rap
ids rode all the way TO the residence of
Commissioner Holmes to solicit his i'm
mediate attendance. 1t so happened
that several citizens OF Jackson land
among them Mr.. d. A. Hunter) were in
the city on other business that day, and
by accident got wind of what was going
on, and in behalf of themselves and 9th
ers of the township opposed to this bond
grab, requested Mr. w. T. McCarty to
be present on their behalf and do what
he could to protect their interest.
Tae board, in the absence of the coun-
ty attorney, requested Judge Kellogg to
advise them in the premises. The rail
road had an ardent advocate in Judge
Peyton.
The board was called TO order, the
president stating that the meeting was a
special one to consider this matter only
The petition was then presented, calling
an election 10 vote on this bond propo-
sition. The law provides that when a
petition of this kind is for the first time
presented, it must be signed by two
fifths of the resident taxpayers
County Clerk Ewing, swoTe that the pc
tition contained two-fifths of the tax
payers of the township, but he did not
know that they were all resident tax pay
ers. Mr.. Jones, commissioner FOR the
Rapids, swore that the petition contain
ed names ofiwo-fifths of the resident
tax payers, TO THE BEsT OF HIS KNowI
EDGE. On cross examination, he swore
that he knew some to be resident tax
payers and he knew some on the list TO
be nonresident tax payers, he could not
say how many were resident nor how
many were nonresident taxpayers. MIR.
AIcCartY in and opposing the calling of
An election on the petition, made the fol.
Owing points:
1. That there was not sufficient legal
evidence before the board that two fifths |
IF the actual resident tax payers of Jack |
son had signed this call.
9 That in the submission of a second
of this nature in the same
,ownship, the ames of a majority of the |
egal voters shall sign the petition and |
lot two-ffths only, and cited the latter |
part of section GS, page 793 of the gener-
election TO be held for the /
same purpose the same shall not be held /
unless upon a petition Of majority of |
he Icgak voters of such county township
or city.
B. There being now 100000 on the
ownship for the same purpose it would
Dc illegal to vute that additional sum
before these outstanding bonds were acs-
laZlg Cancelled.
4. Tint the commissioners should as
j matter OF f4irness, give those opposed
o the bonds an Opportunity to be heard
BEFORE the expense Of an election
hould be incurred, in view Of the fact
hat it was represented to the board that
number Of those who were on the pc
itionihad signed under misappTehession
II the facts and would Withdrawn their
names as soon as the proper paper could
,e drawn and presented TO them.
-Four names 10 a paper were presented
" Mr.. Hunter. asking the boart, to
withdraw their signatures, These
names were gotten by Mr.. II. from par