The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1898-03-22
CONTRACT MAY BE ILLEGAL.
JUDGE FALLIGANT INDICATES HIS
VIEWS ON TIE SEWER QUESTION.

II He Were to Render "a Decision in
the House Drainage Injunction
suit Now on the Prima FReie Ev-
idence as Submitted He WOuld De-
clare Both Contract and Notes In
vsIid-WIn Consider Briefs From
Attorneys First, HOwever-Mr.
ROurke Tells why He Wanted the
Notes Tested.
The injunction suit to prevent the city
issuing notes to pay the house drainage
contractors, has not been decided yet.
The court was occupied with the case yes
terday morning and part of the afternoon.
Messrs. Harry Karger John RourHe
and M A O'Byrne were on the stand as
witnesses. MIR Lawrence, attorney for the
| petitioners, cited a number of authorities
where municipalities had been forbidden
by the courts to contract or pay indebted
ness beyond their constitutional liability
| The case was not argued by the attor-
neys, however. and it looked for awhile
as if they might agree upon a consent de-
cree and have the matter dismissed by
the court.
The attorneys finally decided to
submit briefs for the consideration
| of the court. Judge Falligant
indicated very clearly to the at
torneys that if called upon to render a
decision upon the prima face evidence.
that he would be compelled to decide not
only that the notes were illegal, but that
the contract itself was unconstitutional,
the notes being merely the evidence Of
debt created by the contract and the city's
debt being already in excess of the con-
stitutional limit. As this is a result de-
sired by none of the parties to the suit,
it is likely that the attorneys will confer
upon the matter before pressing it further
upon the attention of the court.
Mr. Lawrence attempted TO show by au-
thorities that the notes could be declared
illegal without voiding the contract, but
it was evident that the court did not
agree with him in this view.
The evidence brought out corroborated
that taken last Saturday in showing that
the suit was instigated by the contrac-
tors for the purpose of establishing the
status of the city's notes, with the prob
able result of having them declared ille~
gal. The attorneys present in connection
with the suit were Mr.. Lawrence, repre-
senting the petitioners; Messrs. Pope Bar
how and f. G. duBignon, representing the
! contractors, and City Attorney s. B. Ad-
ans, representing the city Mayor Mel
| drim was present during the greater part
of the hearing and advised with Mr.. Ad-
ans during the progress of the case.
Some time was spent by the attorneys
in discussing the admissibility of a report
ed statement by Mr.. M. A. OByrne as to
the existence of certain papers, which was
finally cut short by Judge Falligant. who
ordered that Mr.. O'Byrne be sent for.
Mr.. Karger was the first witness put
on the stand. He testified positively that
there had been no collision between him
self and the contractors in bringing the
| suit, and that he had never discussed the
matter with any of them Neither was
| lie acquainted with the other two parties
to the suit, Messrs, Rose and Amar. He
did not know that he had ever met Mr..
| Rose, and did not know Mr.. Aimar until
the bill was filed. He had no conversa-
ton with anybody about the suit, he said,
| until he saw Mr. Lawrence about the mat
| ter. He had no conversation with any
| one about seeing Mr.. Lawrence previous
| to seeing him. Neither Mr. Aimar nor
Mr.. Rose had ever suggested to him the
| bringing of the suit. He did not know
anything about Mr.. Rose or MIR. Aimar
having seen Mr. Lawrence. He just hap
! pened to see the same lawyer, he said
|
Mr.. Adams questioned Mr.. Karger close
] ~ in the effort to bring out who or what
! had prompted him to see Mr. Lawrence in
! reference to bringing the suit, but did not
| secure any admissions. Frequent opposi-
ton to Mr. Adams queries was made by
| Mr.. Lawrence and Mr.. Barrow
MIR. o. Bryne took the stand and identl-
fled the papers transferring the interest
| of w. r. Leaken and OConnor G. o. Byrne
in the contract to Rourke & Mitchell Tho
transfer was in writing. The Mitchels
had agreed to the contents of the paper,
but had never signed.
! Mr. John Rourke was put upon the stand
| by Mr.. Adams and questioned at length
with regard TO his interest in the suit Mr.
| Rourke was unable TO say whether he
| knew Mr.. Rose or not. He thought not
He had no conversation, he said, with
Mr.. Karger before the suit was brought
and knew nothing of his connection with
the case. He had only a slight acquaint-
ance with Mr.. Karger. he said, and re-
membered TO have spoken TO him only
once in the last several months This was
when he went into MIR. Kargers Office for
the purpose of buying a split ticket
On being asked to the testimony given
| by Mr. Aimar Saturday in reference to
the conversation the two had as to the
city notes, Mr.. Rourke said the testimony
was substantially correct He had had
and had said that if suit of this sort
should be brought IL would help to
"straighten out matters" He did not sug-
gest to Mr.. Aimar to see Mr. Lawrence
but told him that his attorneys were Bar
row & Osborne. He had no Understanding
with Mr.. Aimar as 10 the expenses of
the suit.
In answer to a question by Mr.. Law
renee, MIR. Rourke said he had received
5000 in notes from the city upon which
he had endeavored to secure money from
the banks, but in order to do so he had
to give mortgage on his property. The
city is now due him about $4,000 In notes
for which he has not called, as they would
not be of any assistance to him in eecur-
ing money.
Mr.. Rourke wished to relate his expert
ence to the court In endeavoring to secure
money on the notes, but Mr.. Adams inter-
posed objections to his statements. When
he went into the contract, Mr.. Rourke
said, he was given to understand that the
notes could be readily disposed of at par
and a charge of per cent for BROKERAGE
He afterwards found that this could not
ba I,sIl ~