The San Francisco call., 1898-02-15
KOCH'S VETO
 IN THE WAY San Jose Street-Sweeping Job Is Certain of
 Failure. Arguments Heard in the In- junction Suit Against
 the Council. Restraining Order Declared Unneces- gary, Because of the Mayors
 Attitude.
Special Dispatch to The Call.

SAN JOSE, Feb. 14.-There was an unusual array of legal talent in Judge Kittredge's court this morning when the hearing on the restraining order re- gently procured by Sanford E. Smith, member of the New Charter Club, to enjoin the Mayor and Common Coun- cil from awarding a three-year con- tract for sweeping the streets to Nasn & McReynolds came up. Attorneys Spencer and Veuve appeared for Mayor Koch and Councilmen Fay, D1ttus' Krieg and Noting; Attorneys Bird and Sullivan for Nash & McReynolds, While Attorneys Hardy, Wilcox and Brown looked after the interests of Mr. smith and the New Charter Club. A number of spectators were present, but the only city official who appeared in court was Councilman Nolting.
 Smiths petition for restraining or der was read. It set forth that the contract awarded by the Council to Nash & McReynolds would amount to a sum in excess of the amount avail able in the city treasury for this pur- pose It also claimed that the bid of Nash & McReynolds was not the low est and best bid, and if the contract was carried out it would cause great loss and be a detriment to the taXpay- CTS.
 To this Mayor Koch filed a separate answer. He asked that the restraining order, as far as he was concerned, be dismissed. The matter had already been determined before the beginning of the suit. He had vetoed the ordi- nance, and without his signature the street-sweeping contract could not go into effect.
 Attorney Spencer then read the ob- jections of the Mayor and Common Council. It was stated that the re- straining order should be dissolved, as it was improvidently made; as the matter in issue had been fully deter mined and ended before the commence ment of said suit; that defendants, or either of them, had not since February 1, 1898, threatened, offered or attempted to award any contract; that in order to pass any resolution or ordinance refer ring to said contract 1t would be neces- sary to obtain the consent of the Mayor and the latter official has al- ready filed his veto of the same; and it further denied that the awarding of the contract would cause any injury to plaintiff or to any taxpayer in San Jose. A dismissal of the injunction was
 
 facts, matters or things entitling plain tiff to @ restraining order. It was claimed that the restraining order was uncalled for; that alleged and pretend ed or threatened acts of defendants were fully terminated or ended prior to the commencement of plaintiffs suit on February l, 1898; that 1t did not appear that since or subsequent to the 1st of February these defendants, or either of them, had offered or attempt ed to enter into any contract with Nash & McReynolds.
 Nash & McReynolds' answer was longer than the others, but the points raised were substantially the same
 As soon as Attorney Spencer finished reading the answer of the Mayor and Common Council, he began an argu- ment along the lines laid out in the answer. Attorney Veuve followed Spencer on behalf of the Councilmen, and while Attorney Hardy was still ar guing for the complainant, $. E. Smith, adjournment was taken until Wednes- day.