Savannah morning news., 1885-10-16
UNDER AN INJUNCTION.
TRYING 10 BEAT THE COUNTY
OUT OF A NEW JAIL.

OF augusta, was serFeu On IhS S"NN'y
commissioners yesterday, temporarily re-
straining them from occupying the site
AT Habersham street and Perry street Ia
recently granted by the city for the erection
OF new Jail.
The Injunction was applied for by
Judge ". D Harden, and Messrs. A. ,.
Bacon, Thomas Bal antyne, George
Cornwell, A. Barrie, Julius Hunt, I. Ii:
I Had d, Matthew Hogan and Alfred
Haywood, through their attorneys, Car
raId Il Meldrim.
The compliments 20 on 70 show that In
july 1889, the County COmmissloners ap-
piled to the city Council tor the property
at Habersham street and Perry street
lane as a site upon " hich TO erect jail,
and that learning Of the application the
| compiainants, with a number OF residents
| Of thar part Of the city, petiuoned the
! Council not to convey the Prop~rty asked
/ Tor 10 the OmmissiOners, and protested
/ against the erection Of jail in that VI
| entity. Tne Council in the follow
| iug December, refused 10 grant the
property asked FOR. Tue COmmiss oners
again applied for a transfer Of the proper
~ and the compainants aud other citi-
1ens a second time entered their protest
! and the Council refused to grant The land.
A third application vas made setting
forth as an additional reason why the
land should be granted that the COmmls-
sioners had bought three lots atthe corner
Of Liberty and Price streets, but that tneY
were not so well located for the purposes
OF a jail, nor so well lifted
as those sought from the
city. The location OF the Jail on these
lots they SAID would be much more oh
noxious to the residents OF that vicinity
than on the site sought for, but notwith-
Standing this they Were about to erect the
jail on the Liberty and Price streets lots,
and would most certainly do so unless
the Council would reconsider its previous
retusas and exchange the Habersham
and Perry street lane property for tho
three lots. and that if this appeal failed
it was the last time they should apply co
the city and would without further delay
proceed to erect the jail on the site
already purchased.
TIE complainants again opposed the
commissioners before Council, alleging
hat they had no intention Of building
Jail on the Liberty street property, but
nad merely bought it to enable them to
Xert a pressure on the Council by max.
ing IL believe that unless it permitted the
erection OF a jail on the Habersham street
property 1t would assuredly be put in
place much more Objectionable. In the
7
say that it was intimated as a further
/ pressure that the legislature might be ap-
pe8led to for the land, Notwithstanding
The clty's strong Obi elton. The council
or third time refused grant of the
ard.
/ The complainants at that time said that
/ Il the land was refused. and the commits
siOners attempted TO build on the Liberty
I street property, me cOmplainants would
inf E-st
said that the commissioners could
/ build the Jail in that neighborhOod,
/ Notwithstanding the objection of the resi-
/ dents, then the cOmplalnants would with.
iraw all further objections to the crssiOn
/ 1t the public domain at Habersham and
/ Perry street lane, and the Ill could be
1rected where the Commissioners saw f.,
/ Tor they fully agreed with the Commits
! Sloners that the location OF the Jail on
! Liberty street was more obnoxious than
| 10 would be on the Habersham street
| property, and the cOmplainants were
/ willing, If forced to choose either. to sub
/ nit to the lesser rather than the
/ greater evil. A bill for relief and
| injunction was then prepared ready to be
/ dled 10 case of necessity, aud furtner ac-
! tion on the part Of the Com miss iOners was
! awaited. Tbis came, the complainants
/ say, in an unexpected manner.
! 7.
/ Was introduced in Council, without notice
| of any kind 70 those interested in opposing
the measure. and, in the absence of one
J Of their number charged with the man.
agement OF the defense of the residents
/ Of the city from what they claimed
20 be an unjust ana arbitrary
use OF power which was invoked against
! them, asking tor transfer OF the property
! which had already been refused. The or
a Nagl =.
! rules, until the next meeting Of Council.
No notice WAS given to the complaints,
they al eye, except that contained in the
! published proceedings of Council, and
that the ordinance was passed with 5ut
their having a chance to oppose It.
They further say that the erection of =
new Jail is unnecessary the present Jail
being sufiicien tly strong, secure and COM
modious, we'll ventilated, lighted and
heated and with a capacity for 100 pris-
0ners-6O more than are now confined in
10. So secure aud commodious is the
present jail, the complainants 90 on to
say, that prisoners from Otler counties
are frequently brought here for coufne.
ment, while the lot upon which II 4,
located is ample to afford room fOr
the exercise of the prisoners, and even II
10 should become necessary 10 build a
new jail the present site could be utilized
and would be preferable to that sought.
which in the opinion or the c1mplainan. S
- too small. Tue changes proposed
would alsO IN their opinion impair the
value OF property in that part Of the
city aud will seriously injure their
interests. The city, they claim. is
q ready heavily bnrdened with an In.
debtedness OF over so 100000. and The
erection of the propo ed jail a. an est.
mat d cost OF 800 eco. would make This
burden still HEAVIER. They also refer %
the authority granted by the Legislature
10 raise money for the purpose of build.
ng the proposed jail, and claim that the
true meaning ot the act is that
tho erection OF the jail should FIRST be sub
mitted 10 the voters OF the county. and
that then an election shall be held Il
authorize the issue of bonds.
In conclusion, the cOmDlainants pray
thattue commissioners be restricted from
making or accepting any proposals goi
erecting the proposed jail on the iaber
sham ana PER-, street lane property.
In the abs OF Judge Adams The mat
ter was taken before Jud .e Rlney, OF An
gusta. aud on "Wednesday temporary in
junction was granted until the case car
bee heard. Judge Roney has fixed Wed
nesday, Oct. u. lOr "A hearing.
Commissioners Walker and Casey were
served with he Injunction Yesterday. The
remaining M inbcrs OF the board are out
Of toe city. The case was tled in the Su-
perior Court Clerks Office yesterday morn
Ing and created considerable stir during