The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1898-09-23
The Injunction Case Aqsinst the
City Of Houston
10 RESTRAIN A RESALE OF BONDS
IL Set for Hearing at the September
Term of the Federal Court
mt Jefferson.
>...... .............s....... ........
4: The Injunction suit against the
1: city to restrain the sale OF the
: 100000 street improvement bonds
/: Is transferred 10 the Federal
/: court,

The hearing OF the case of W. ]. Hayes &
Sons of Cleveland. Ohio, versus the City OF
Houston. set for yesterday In Judge VIII
sons court. for an Injunction to restrain
the sale by the city of 100000 Of street
improvement bonds and for a mandamus 10
compel the issuance Of same to the COM
plainants, did not take place as was an
nounced, for the reasons given In the fol-
lowing statement taken from the Calves
ton News:
Judge David L. Bryant OF the United
States circuit court, In chambers at Sher-
man, has granted temporary injunction
restraining the sale of 800 600 OF bonds ls-
sued by the city of Houston for street i'm
proyement purposes. The restraining or
der was issued upon complaint II ". j..
Hayes d Sons OF Cleveland, Ohio, and Is
made returnable on Wednesday, Septem-
Der 20, at 10 n. IN. at the Federal court.
which will be convened for the September
term at Jefferson on next Monday, wneu
the mayor AMI municipal authorities OF
Houston are cited to appear and show
souse why the Injunction should not be
made permanent.
Inc petition ara OIucT OF JuuRe bTydut
Was received at thn office OF CierL3Dart OF
the United States court in Galveston yes
terday. but the matter was not gwen out
for publication because process had not
seen served on the parties Interested This
Information was obtained through other
sources,
On September l2 at Houston w. j. HAYES
Son Of Cleveland, ohio, who purchased
the 100000 Of permanent Improvement
bonds of the city on August 20, ana then
forfeited their $4,000 check on September
by not paying Tor the bonds according to
the claim Of the city applied for an lniunc-
ton to restrain the city from selling the
bonds again, and for q mandImus TO com
pei the city 10 procure the attorney gem
erals signature OF approval to the bonds
and deliver the bonds TO them
Judge Tod Issued temporary Injunction
and fixed the application for hearing for
September %.
The sale Of the bonds was advertised for
noon on September g The mayor an
nounccd that while no adverse decision
was anticipated In tho injunction suit. vet
the bonds would be sold subject thereto
Al the appointed hour the bonds we're Of
fered for sale, and the first bid was pre-
MUM. There were only three bidders. ana
they were Rudolph Kleyholtc & Co of Gin
cinnatl, Ohio; Dcnis0n. Prior q Co Of
Cleveland, Ohio and splitter & co. Of Tole-
DO, Ohio Splitter y CO, BID premium OF
seo2b, and then Rudolph Kleyboltc G. Co
of Cincinnati bid premium Of s652G. and
the bcnds were knocked down 10 tho latter
bidder This Is better bid for the city
by S2Oo than was the bid Of W. J. HAYES
Son Of Cleveland, to whom the bonds
were knocked down on August 20 last Tho
sale was conducted by auction, and the
highesi bidder secured the bonds cubiect 10
this suit.
Al O'Clock yesterday afternoon. tho
timr set for the hearl~ Of the case OF J,
NJ Coleman. attorney Tor plaintiff filed nm
application setting up The fact that this
cause had been taken TO the United States
circuit court aud that at the proner time
the AFFIDAVIT and bond for removal from
me district court would he flied