The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-11-26
CEDAR STREET KICK
DETAILS OF THE PROTEST
AGAINST ASPHALT PAVING
ASSESSMENT
DOZEN PROPERTY OWNERS

They File With the Corporation At
tOrney Il Numerous, If Not "a For
midabIe, List of Objections to the
Assessment for the Recent I'm
prOVement of the Street From
Second Street to Summit Avenue.
A dozen of the property owners on
Cedar street, between Second street and
Summit avenue, will contest in the courts
the assessment for the paving Of the
street between the points mentioned.
The contract was let to the Warren
Scharff company by the board of public
works, and an asphalt pavement laid at
a cost of So, AZ. 40. which sum Included
the cost of inspection and expenses con-
nected with the levying and collecting of
the assessment.
OF the total assessment but $15S15 has
been paid into the city treasury and the
city treasurer next Saturday will make
application to the district court for judg-
ment againt the delinquent owners
When the assessment was completed
and confirmed by the board of public
works, objections We're filed against such
action by the dozen property owners, but
the board, at the advice of the legal de-
parment. went ahead and finished the
assessment. Now the directors have filed
with the corporation attorney protests
and the court will be asked to consider
the point raised at the time when the city
asks for judgment against the delin-
Quents.
The DIRECTORS are:
J. II. Wheeler. Mary and Anton Spring
er, f. A. Seymour and W. H. Lightner.
as receivers of the Bank of Minnesota:
Phoenix company, Grace King, Margaret
and James Brady, Lizzie B. Schliek,
Central Presbyterian church, B. w.
Smith, Benjamin Eichberg, Simon Sichei
and Frederick Martin.
The objections, fifteen in number In
each case, are on the following points:
Council had no Jurisdiction; board of
public works, no jurisdiction to make
contract or assessment; district court. no
jurisdiction TO enter Judgment the street
had been previously paved under direc-
ton OF council and board of public works,
and property assessed had paid its share
OF the BURDEN the pretended improve
ment was not the paving of the street,
but the requirement.; no petition was ever
made or presented to the council signed
Dy any property owner; that the question
of property benefited was never deter
mined by the board of public works; the
assessment was not made upon all prop
efty benefited, and was arbitrary, unjust
and unequal; that over 1000 feet of prop
erty fronting on the street was omitted
from the assessment; the assessment
includes the expense and cost of repaVine
the intersections Of Eighth Ninth, Tenth
ana Eleventh streets. and College and
summit avenues; that, in addition to the
expense of making the Improvement the
assessment is for keeping the street In
repair for ten years; that the assessment
Is for the collecting of $32, 412 40, which is
$4,s6l.66 in excess of the reasonable cost
OF making the improvements; that the city
Is entitled to a diminution amounting to
Se4z' on account of liability of ST. Paul
street railway company; the assessment
was the result Of a mistake of fact and
hiegaI principle Of assessment, and con-
sututes fraud on the directors; the as
seSsment is an attempt to deprive OBJ
Jectors Of property without due process
OF law and repugnant to the fourteenth
amendement of the Constitution of the
United States