St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-04-05
Dixie FIGHT IS Done.
Testimony All in and the
Commission Will Duly
Deliberate.
Yesterdays Evidence Show
ing Full Price Was Paid
for the Land.
City Cuts Short in the Hearing
Believing That Enough
Was Shown.
Able Arguments Poured Into
the Commissions Ears
by the Hour.

by the Hour.
Yesterday was the last day Of hear
Ing of testimony before the West side
levee commission, morning and after
noon sessions being held in order that
the commission could close the case.
At the opening of the morning proceed
lngs City Attorney Phillips sprung a
surprise on the opposite side by an
nouncing that he would offer no further
testimony OH behalf of the city, for the
authorities had come to the conclusion
that, though they could call a host
of witnesses, they would but cor
roborate the testimony already put in.
The contestants had petitioned every
public body during the last few years,
and had always been defeated in their
claims, and now it was sought as last
resort to tie up matters for another two
years, in order TO defeat bills now be-
fore the legislature. He could, on be-
half Of the city, produce witnesses every
day for another week, but did not de-
sire to further take up the time of the
commissioners.
Judge Wood objected to the course of
the city attorney, for he was anxious to
have the commission take an adjourn
ment, in order that the attorneys for
the petitioners might prepare argu-
mentS and submit further evidence.
w. p. Murray strongly objected to
any adjournment. The commissioners
had announced that they would not sit
beyond that day, but the city was pre-
pared to stay with the other side night
and day until they were satisfied their
case was complete. He, however, OBJ
jected to any delay which would jeop-
Judge WOod-What bills do you refer
to?
Mr.. Murray-To the bill which pro-
vides that the city may grant leases of
levee property for manufacturing pur-
poses.
Judge Wood-That is the very bill we
want TO defeat this session.
CorrobOratiVe Evidence
Messrs. AnSel Oppenheim and Will
fam Dawson, who had been invited by
the commission to give testimony, ar
rived at this point, and being informed
that the city was ready to submit its
case without further evidence. the gen
tlemen desired to be heard Oh their own
request.
MI. Oppenheim then stated that in
under water, and the value of land was
nominal. He purchased in that year
twenty-four acres of land for $4,000,
which was less than SIC a lot. In his
judgment he was fully convinced
that the owners of the lots not
only received full value for their
property, but in many cases they re-
ceived double the value. The original
intention of the city was to build a
levee for protection, and provide facili-
ties for railroads and factories.
Judge Wood, in cross-eXamining,
brought out the history of how the Min
nesota u Northwestern railroad was
formed and obtained entry into West
st. Paul. Mr.. Murray objected to the
line of examination, for it had nothing
to do with the case. but Mir. Wood
persisted that it was very material.
The examination was continued by
Mr.. Wood and assumed a personal
nature between counsel and Mr.. Open
helm until Bishop Ireland interfered
and requested that the facts Of the case
be adhered to.
William Dawson Sr. was then called.
and his evidence cOrrobOrated that OF
Mr.. Oppenheim and previous witnesses
for the city. In his opinion, West side
property was increased skiold in value
after the Kansas City road was built
He cited case where he had sold six
lots, for which he paid 5000, to Mr..
LangeYin for $500, and that gentleman
had sold them for $4,000. Continuing.
MIR. Dawson said: 'ln my opinion the
building OF that leyee was the one thing
which resulted in the building of the
railroad on the West side and | believe
that for every dollars assessment
against the property adjoining at least
500 was received by Increased value of
the property"
No further evidence being offered by
either side, Bishop Ireland announced
that the commission would take a re-
cess until 3, when the arguments by
counsel could be made.
Argument for CompIainants.
Promptly at 8 the commission reas-
sembled. and Attorney A. B. Ovitt pro-
ceeded to set forth his statements of the
case on behalf of the petitioners. He
went over the history of the agitation
for levee ten years ago, and then sub
mitted to the attention OF the commits
sion four propositions: First, that the
city had taken the property for a GER
tain purpose; second, that twelve years
had passed and no work had been done
on the levee; third, that the city had
abandoned its original purpose;
anu lOuIlii. ludG TIC peculiar
rights of the petitioners demanded
municipal act showed that the lands
were acquired for street OF levee, and
he claimed that the city must be gov
erned by that law unless it should be
repealed by the legislature. Webster's
definition of the word levee was "a bank
or causeWay, especially along a river to
prevent limitations" The letter of
City Engineer SeWell which had been
produced showed that the original in
ttntiOn was to build a levee 200 feet
wide to keep the water from flowing
over the flats. The city had not carried
out the original purpose. but it had
leased the property to railroads and
factories, which he claimed was an
abandonment Of the work The facts
spoke for themselves, and he asked the
commission il that was proof of faith
on the clty's part.
The city claimed that it was not lin
TIED TO time III which to finish the work.
but the construction of law was that il
must be done III reasonable time. If
the city had granted leases of the land
for thirty years, it could do so for coo
years. AS to the rights of the petition
els he claimed that they had been taken
advantage Of by the city when the land
was taken. He only asked that the peo-
pie who had relied upon the city be
placed on the same footing with
their more fortunate neighbors
who had been able to recover
through the courts from the city.
He claimed that the city had no right
to lease the property unless it compen-
stated the petitioners. The last legis-
lature had appointed a commission to
decide the matter. but the present Jegis-
lature had abolished it at the instiga,
ton of a member of the Ramsey county
delegation. An attempthad been made
to defeat justice, and on behalf of the
petitioners he begged to submit their
case to the commission and abide by its
decision.