The San Francisco call., 1897-06-18
Decision of Judge Dain-
gerfield Causes a
Sensation.
UnIooked-For Ruling That Is
Severely Criticized by
Taxpayers.
Lawyers Are Amused and Say ar
Appeal VIII Of Course Be
Taken.

SANTA ROSA, CAL, June 17.-Judge
Daingerfeld's long-looked-for decision in
the water-works case was filed in the
clerks Office here to-day and created a
tremendous sensation. 1t taxes just fifty
closely typewriter pages for the Judge to
state why he decides in favor of the
plaintiff, Mock, and against the city, and
to say that this was unlocked for is put
ting it mildly.
The municipal wells are gushing forth
more than 100000 gallons of pure cold
water each day, which was being dis
tributed to rich and poor alike without
direct charge.
Favorable decisions in other courts and
cases involving the same subject-matter
had been repeatedly rendered to luH the
taxpayers into fancied security, and as
the decision of to-day had been locked up
in the breast of the Judge for more than
six months popular interest had some
what waned and the ratepayers were con-
graduating themselves on the successful
termination OF tedious and costly liti-
CATION.
Judge Dalngerfeld's decision was rude
awakening and opens up ali kinds of pos
sibiIities in the way of future litigation. 1t
declares the contract for the erection OF
the water works to be absolutely void 4:
that the water works shall be held in trust
by Contractor Perkins and the Mayor and
Common Council for the Inhabitants and
taxpayers of Santa Rosa, who shall act as
receivers of the court; that an accounting
shalt be had ana the actual value of the
works ascertained, and that judgment be
entered in favor OF the city OF Santa Rosa
and against Perkins, Effey, City Treasurer
Fanderhoof and the Mayor and Common
Council who let the contract for a sum of
money equal to the deficiency, if any, be-
tween the actual valde and the cost.
1t further requires that the works be
sold to determine their value If the par
ties named cannot agree thereon. The
decision directs that plaintiff shall re ecoYer
his costs from all the de efendants except
City Clerk Mobiey, and that Mo bley shall
have and recover his costs from plaintiff.
The decision also covers the case Of Nc
Donald against the city TO restrain the
Treasurer from paying the maturing bonds
and d!ssolves tie restraining order.
Comments on the decision are being
freely made by leading attorneys, and it
seems 10 be the unanimous opinion of
the legal fraternity that 1t will not stand
OF appeal.
Ex-Superior Judge Rutledge, when
asked for his opinion, said that the deci-
sion would have no effect at present, and
would be promptly appealed. He also
said that Judge Daingerfie d had given
rem edles unasked for in giving judgment
against the individuals who mad been sued
IN their official capacity.
City Attorney Webber said "The iudg.
ment is peculiar one. 1t grants relief
TO plaintiff not asked for, ana it will not
stand on appeal"
Attorney J. NJ. Thorn pson declared the
decision 10 be outrageous, and, among
other Things, said: There was nothing in
the evidence to show fraul, so the Judge
could not mold a judgment against per-
sons interested when no fraud was
shown.
"The case surely will be appealed if a
new trial Is refused. The JUICE has gone
outside the case entirely beyond the
pleadlngs. He holds that the bonds were
valid. The city must own the works, as
it paid for them"
Ex-City Attorney Cowen, who con-
Quoted most OF the litigation for the CITY,
was amused yet indignant at the decision
and SAID: 1t seems TO me to be the
height OF absurdity to appoint three mem
bers OF the old Council as receivers to as
certain the amount OF the deficiency which
they themselves must pay
The decision is full of incongruities and
viii not stand. At the present writing q
groups OF citizens can be seen on every
corner discussing the situation, and many
uucomplImentary things can be heard of
al parties concerned.