The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-10-11
THE CEDAR RIVER PLAN.


provide for the acquisition OF the Cedar
river water supply. as outlined by Alder
man elise, the recent decision OF the SUI
rrefne court acquires considerable inter-
est. The decision in question was rem
dered by Chief Justice Hoyt, who has al
ways taken a very independent stand up
on litigation affecting municipal inter-
ests. and Il is eoncurred in by Justices
Anders and Gordon Judges Dunbar and
Scott diszented.
The proposition was much the same az
that now contemplated in Seattle. An or
dinance was passed by the Spokane coun-
eli authorizing the city 10 enter into
contract with financial institution for
the furnishing of money for the compile
ton OF a SYSTEM OF water works for the
city and providing for the issuance 10
them for the money so advanced OF the
obligations of the city payable out OF
special fund TO be created by placing
therein 90 per cent. of the receipts derived
from such water works. The ordinance
was essailed on the ground that The en-
tering into such a contract and TIE is
EbditEE OF <ufit CbiaEdl4DHS VI h4tt I-NI
formed the mourning of an indebtedness
within the meaning Of the constitution.
and that to do so az that time was not
within the power OF the city, for the rea-
son that IT was already indebted beyond
the constitutional limit. The ordinance
was declared Invalid and the council ap-
pealed TO the supreme court
The appellate court decided that the or
dinance was valid. Judge Hoyt, in his de-
clslon, said that for the purposes OF tho
case. II must be conceded that the water
works will, In addition TO supplying the
money for the creation of such fund as pro-
vided for IN said ordinance, pay all the
expenses incident TO their operation, and
for that reason the creation OF such spe-
ciaI fund can occasion no liability upon the
part Of the city TO make any payment
out OF It's general funds. This being so,
he was OF the opinion that neither the or
dinance, the contract. nor the obligations
to be issued by the city in pursuance
thereof would constitute a debt OF the city
within the constitutional definition. The
only obligation assumed on the part of
the city is to pay ont Of the special fund.
and Il is in no manner other
wise liable 10 the beneiciaries I'M
der the contract. The general cred
IL OF the city lis in no manner pledged
except for the performance of its duty in
the creation of such special fund. The
transaction, therefore, is no more the in
curing OF an Indebtedness on the part OF
the city than is the issue Of warrants pay
able out of a special fund created by an
assessment upon property to be benefited
by local Improvement. Hence, the court
holds. the question is upon principle with
in the one decided in Baker VS.. Seattle, in
which IL was held that warrants Issued
10 a contractor for street Improvement
and payable out OF A special fund to be
created by an assessment therefor. wero
not an Indebtedness OF the city within the
meaning OF the constitution.
II is this decision upon which Mr.. elise
mainly relies 10 sustain the city in
It's proposed proceeding. and. II may he
added, number of authorities uphold
this. The constitution allows per cent.
Indebtedness on the assessed valuation
for water works. sewers and electric light
plant. but We have reached our Limit. We
now owe as follows: