The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1898-03-21
KARGER'S TURN COMES NEXT.
WILL DE ASKED WHAT HE KNOWS
ABOUT THE INJUNCTION CASE.

cIines to Discuss the Testimony.
He Wants the Validity of the Notes
Settled One Way or the 0ther-PiDe
Agent on the Scene.
The hearing before Judge Falligant in
the sewer note injunction case against the
city, in which effort is being made just
now by City Attorney S. 3. Adams TO get
at the real reason for it, and not without
some success, will be resumed In the Su-
perior Court at 10 o'clock this morning.
The case had reached an interesting
point when court adjourned on Saturday
! afternoon. Mr. w w. Aimar had stated
how he came TO bring the suit at the sug-
| gestion of Mr.. John Rourke one of the
| contractors, and Mr.. Adams then called
for Mr.. II. Karger, another of the plain
tiffs, about whom MIR. Aimar knew moth
ing until he met him in court in connection
with the suit.
Mr.. Karger will go on the stand this
morning What he will testify to is not
known. but naturally something quite as
interesting as Mr.. Aimar's examination
is expected from him. He expects the
city attorney to get after him in just about
| the same manner that he went for Mr..
| Aimar.
There is a very fine line which has to
! be drawn in the examination of these wit
| nesses. The court permitted, Mr.. Adams
| to question Mr.. Aimar upon the subject
of what conversations he had with Mr..
Rourke about the case but he was, of
| course, not allowed to ask anything about
| what passed between Mr.. Aimar and his
| counsel, Mr.. A A. Lawrence. Such mat
| tiers are regarded as privileged communi-
cations, and are not allowed to be produc-
ed In evidence.
Mr.. Karger will, no doubt, be examined
as to whether he had any conversations
with Mr. Rourke or others of the contrac-
tors with reference to the suit, though the
| general question as to what caused him to
bring it, cannot be asked, that having been
ruled out by the court in the case of Mr..
Aimar.
The question of the validity of such notes
issued by the city under the circumstances
which have been stated, the city's indebt-
edness exceeding the constitutional Iimita-
ton of per cent, etc, has not come to
the front as yet That is the issue upon
which the plaintiffs are fighting and which
they will endeavor to have the court pass
upon though the defense is just now de-
voting itself to showing the origin of and
the reasons for the suit What effect the
fact that the contractors are, in part if
not wholly, responsible for the litigation,
will have upon the ultimate result has not
yet been made apparent.
1t seems from the answer made by
Messrs. Rourke & Mitchell that they either
want the notes established as valid by the
| court, or they want the city to pay for the
sewer work In cash. They have assumed a
| contract to do the work and take the citys
notes for it, 1t is difficult to say what
| would happen If the court should declare
! the notes invalid, and the city should in
| sist upon the performance of the contract
| as it now stands. 1t Isl proposition
which the court will have to untangle
Ii appeared 10 be pretty plainly shown
| In the testimony Saturday that the suit
was instigated by the contractors for the
| purpose of forcing the city into some bet
| ter deal for them. Mr.. John Rourke who
! is one of the principals of the contract,
| ing firm does not admit that such is the
! case. When seen yesterday by a Morn
ing News reporter Mr.. Rourke would
not discuss the testimony of Mr.. Aimar,
which was published in full in yesterdays
| Morning News
IF the court should decide that the
| notes are legal" said Mr.. Rourke, I'VE
! will be perfectly satisfied. With the back
ing of the court we will then be able to
| float the notes, which at present we are
|
| city has no right TO issue the notes, then
the city will be compelled to provide some
| other means of paying for the work. All
| we want is payment for our work. When
| l entered the contract l understood that
| the notes were legal and that we would be
| able to float them without trouble. On
| the contrary, We have not secured a single
| dollar on the notes. Our creditors are
| pressing us for money, and we are unable
| hpPanSp NJ
on the notes.
Suppose the suit is thrown out of
court?" Mr.. Rourke was asked.
THE Judge will hardly dispose of the
case without passing on the legality of the
notes." Mr.. Rourke said. I'VE want TO
see decision one way or the other"
Attorneys who have considered the In
| junction suit say that it presents many
peculiar features, and that it is liable to
develop unlooked-for results. Either the
| city or contractors, or both, may be put
in bad box. A decision that the notes
issued by the city are illegal would be a
bad thing for the city, and might put a
| stop to the practice of issuing notes for
the opening of streets and for other pur-
poses. With the suit thrown out of court
the contractors will be in a bad box. as
they will be in the position of having at
| tackled the validity of their own collateral
and yet having nothing better with which
TO deal. They have gone TO heavy ex-
| pense and could not abandon the work
now without great loss to themselves. to
say nothing of the $4,000 bond given for
the completion of the contract
Mr.. T. F. McCurdy, representing the Co.
lumbia Fire Clay Company of Ohio. which
is furnishing the sewer pipe for the con-
tract, arrived i'm the city last night. Mr..
McCurdy's object in coming here is to OBJ
tain a settlement with the contractors
for the pipe furnished. He knew nothing
of the injunction suit and was quite
taken by surprise when informed of the
circumstances.
when l made the contract with BRYAN
Delaney & Hepf to furnish the pine" said
Mr.. McCurdy, II was given to understand
that New York firm had agreed to take
all the notes on terms satisfactory TO the
contractors"
Naturally. MIR. McCurdy is not very we'll
pleased with the turn affairs have taken
He will probably be among the interested
| spectators in court this morning
SAVANNAH's BANK CLEARINGs.