The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-05-19
OLD PARK LAW DUG UP
ROCKER WANTS TO KNOW WHY
THE BOARD DID NOT USE 1T.
Hearings of demonstrators VIII BE
Completed To-Day - InequaIi-
ties to he Remedied.

L
would be finished to-day. At any rate. the
Board Of Works and the city attorney are
anxious to bring it to a close. Yesterday
most of the demonstrators between Capt.
tol and Central avenues were heard. Some
were not on hand. The board desires that
all who have not been heard shall appear to-
day.
City Attorney Kern said that he did not
apprehend that the attorneys who have rep
resented the demonstrators would care to
make any oral arguments before the board.
Some have expressed desire to make some
suggest lions with regard to law questions.
AS the time for closing the hearing draws
near there is some anxiety among the city
officials to know whether threatened liti-
cation will materialize. Attorneys were
reticent yesterday as to what they would
do. Some are undecided as to what kind
Of proceedings to bring. The board has
carefully avoided giving any limitations of
what it would do in the way Of modifying
assessments. 1t Is believed by some of the
attorneys that the board does not intend
to make its finding public until after the
modified rolls have been approved. If this
is true it is said it would then be too late
to file suits to enjoin the approval of the
rolls, and the demonstrators would simply
have the right to appeal from the assess
ments allowed them for their land or taxed
against them en- account of alleged benefits.
The assessments would thus become liens.
An attorney said yesterday that the notices
to the property owners were very shrewdly
worded. They designate that the board is
proceeding under the provisions of the char
ter. The charter provides that when ap-
peals are taken from the board under the
section it is being guided by the appeals
shall apply only to the appellants and shall
not affect other portions Of the proceed
ings. 1t is also provided that appeals shall
only be taken as with regard to the amount
Of benefits and damages, not with regard to
the regularity of the proceeding. The at
torneys who have noticed this point in the
notices served on their clients believe that
1t was the intention to bind them to the
section of the charter in question. There
is talk of paying no attention whatever to
the boards proceedings so far as taking
its record of benefits and damages into
court, but simply to ask for an injunction
against threatened proceedings on the
ground that it has no jurisdiction whatever
and is abrogating authority not delegated
to it, beside attempting to cloud titles or
real estate without a shadow of right.
If an injunction suit is not brought the
board will proceed to take possession of the
thority to purchase all tracts worth more
than $1,000 They will all be covered in
one ordinance. warrants Will be drawn
and left for the persons from whom the
land is taken. This Will amount to tender
of the money. No formal action has to be
taken when it comes to reducing the land
to possession, the city attorney says. When
the board gets ready to begin the improve
ments all 1t has to do is to set it's men to
work. Mr.. Kern said that as the hearing
had proceeded the board had discovered
that errors had been made in both direc-
tions-in some instances by not awarding
Io,,o 20. fIn and = q
taken and in other instances by making the
benefits to adjacent lands too heavy. mis-
he said, would doubtless be remedied;
City Attorney Kern says that there is
nothing in a point raised yesterday by Will
liam " Rocker, attorney for James A;
Sutherland and others Mr.. Sutherland
owns tracts that have been assessed as
benefited SO, 375. None of his ground is taken
''Why do you proceed under the charter
rather than the park law of 1872 Mr.
Rocker asked the board and city attorney
The question surprised them. .
1--WE are proceeding under the cnarter,
was the only response coming from the city
The park law of 1884, to which Mr.. Rocker
referred was passed the day before the
said yesterday they had never heard or 1t
before. 1t provides for Common Councils
and trustees of all incorporates towns . ana
cities to acquire parks, designating that ap-
praisers shall be appointed TO NIX tne VaIue
of lands to be condemned, and authorizes
a tax levy of not to exceed per cent. for
their purchase and improvements. In 1898
the act was amended so as to provide bonds
might be sold to anticipate the collection
of the special tax levy and place the money
at the Immediate disposal Of the Council
or trustees, as the case might be. :,
EVERY lawyer knows about that law,
said the city attorney when he was asked
what he kneW about the park law, OF 1891
cit does not apply to Indianapolis" .
mot even when there is no provision IN
p Fag G"@f'ef covering 'l0
1T does not apply to Indianapolis" per-
sisted Mr.. Kern.
Mr.. Rockers theory is that inasmuch as
the charter does not govern proceedings Ior
acquiring parks the general law or the
fact that the charter and the park law
were passed at the same session, within one
day of each other, in fact-the park law
the day before the chartey-it was clearly
the intention of the Legislature to pass
park law that might be taken advantage or
by other cities as well as indianapolis. Inc
fact that in 1895 the Legislature passed an.
other park law applicable only to cities or
100, 900 or more, he argues, went to snow
that there was nothing in the charter that
gave the Board of Works any necessary
authority, and that the act OF 1891 was re-
garded as not broad enough, inasmuch as 1t
did not provide for the assessment or ben
efits, a way of raising money that was once
regarded as desirable here before there had
been any practical demonstration OF It's
Members of the Council said last night
that they had never heard anything ABOUT
the general park law OF lS$l I'VE ey were ire
law under which the city could ACQUIRE
parks unless a section of the charter was
stretched to give that authority. VI course
] am not a lawyer, but do not see why
the general law would not apply 70 Inulan-
apolis if there was nothing explicit IN re-
gard to parks in the charter 1t explains
one thing to me- though" said the council
man. ''That is why they were so dead
anxious to get us to appropriate the S52OOVO
for the use of the Board OF works. They
wanted to tie our hands II we had known
about that law we might have taken steps
to see whether it was really IN our power
to locate the parks. With all that money
on hand 1t would not have peen necessary
to resort to a one-cent tax levy either unul
il came to improving the parks. None no one
either, and we would have come nearer
living up to our promise last 1aII not 10
assess benefits for parks, ana al these
bowls would not have been made. our
platform and all of our speeches. talked
about making all the people pay tor the
they kept the knowledge from US. Iney
knew well enough if we heard ABOUT tnaI
law of 1891 we would not nave appropriated
that money to the Board or works. we
would have spent ii ourselves, ana tnen
maybe we could have got parks where we
wanted them instead Of up there on Fall
creek, where only men like Iaggart ana
those fellows with fast horses can get any
good out of them.''
Other attorneys who were asked Ior an
opinion as to whether the park law or 1891
would apply to Indianapolis, in the absence
of any other statutory provisions on the
subject, were unwilling to express q oeclued
opinion, although Messrs. McBrlde az Denny
were inclined to think off handed II was not
the intention of the Legislature. MI Denny
had not heard of the law When asked apout I
it, In the circumstances of Messrs. Merrill
MO0reS and JOhn p Wilson. filed for clients