The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1893-04-13
PERPETUAL,
is THE INJUNCTION AGAINST The
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.


b estrainins Them From Paying the Bal
anoe on the $4,000 Contract Made
with the City For the Disposal of the
Court House and Jail Sewage.
Judge McCarty this afternoon rendered
his decision in the controversy brought
forward by Massillon people, objectine
to the payment, by the county, of an as
sessment for the use of The Canton sewer.
The commissioners when the sewer was
constructed agreed to pay $4,000 to assist
In building tho sewer and making con-
nections herewith In order TO take care
of the sewage from the court house and
jail. One third Of this amount, $3,3S3 .33,
,Ss gsv Psd to sGS csn,on treasurer snd there
Ia yet due the two other payments
ageregating 6,66666. The Massillon par
ties objected TO the payment OF this
amount out Of the county funds, and q
temporary Injunction was secured aud
the case went to trial. The city claimed
that the sewer would not have been built
II the county had not decided TO pey that
portion of the cost covered by $1,000.
Judge McCarty's opinion was given at
considerable length. He said that the
city and the county had needed system
of sewers for years and that noxious va
pors arising from the improper disposition
of sewage was detrimental to the health
Of the citizens and visitors at the county
the plaintiffs in the case was
that the county could not lawfully be tax
ed in this instance. The agreement to
pay had been made by the county com
missioners with a special commission
from the city council, Messrs, Volkmhn
and Dannemiller. About 81 cents per foot
front was levied, and for laterals about 81
In hn
had been paying about 81 200 year for
the disposition of the sewage by having 1t
carted away. The court said that IL was
looked upon as u good investment, pro-
vided the county had the right TO make It,.
The Issues TO be determined involved the
rights OF the county commissioners to
maka such encouragement With the city,
and whether IL was Irregular. The Board
of Commissioners agreed to allow the
money, as the Board OF Health was
liable at any time to declare the county
building q nuisance, on account OF inade-
quate sewer arrangements.
Judge McCarty decided that the county
property was liable to assessment. He
cited the law at length, showing that
things we're not liable to assessments, but
was very decidedly of the opinion that the
county property could be assessed, where
such assessment was for something which
was of benefit to the property, "a was
shown to be the fact In tDls case. Inc
law declares that all assessments mUst be
uniform. No legislative body can devise q
rule which will be entirely fair, for a
vacant lot may be assessed as much as n
lot With building on IL, and no benefits
received. The law says the scheme
must be uniform and II will
not do for the city to discriminate against
the county. The statutes do not auIhorS
ize the county commissioners TO make
such contract as the one made in this
instance. II they had no power to make
the contract they had no right to order the
payment of any money on such con-
tract.
Judge McCarty decided that though
there may be benefits to show that such
action was good investment on the part
of the commissioners, IL could not, IL no
power was vested in them to make such o
contract, be ratified. The Injunction re-
straining the county from paying over
S6,666 .66 was made perpetual.
City Solicitor Turner at once gave notice
of appeal.