The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1899-06-27
THE FENCE BRINGS TROUBLE.
MAYOR AND ALDERMEN MAY BE
RULED FOR CONTEMPT.

giant on Saturday Why They
shouId Not he Ruled for Contempt
for the Removal of the Sack Fence
Contrary TO the order of the Court.
Several of the City 0mcials IncIud-
ed in the Order-CIty Attorney
Adams Says the order Was Not n
Restraining order and That the
Mayor and Aldermen Were Not
Restrained From Interfering With
the Fence.
The peremptory removal Of the
fence around the property Of the Sack
estate on Lincoln street, between Second
and Third streets, by the city officials,
acting under instructions Of the Mayor,
Is likely to cause a considerable commo-
tion and the result may be to show that
the city was hasty in its action In the
matter.
Last Friday the heirs Of Anna NJ. Sack,
through their attorney, Mr.. w. P. La
Roche, appeared before Judge Falligaut
with a petition stating that they had been
served with a notice by the city attorney
to the effect that the city marshal had
been directed to remove certain en-
croachments upon Lincoln, Second and
Third streets. The petitioners denied that
the city had ever acquired any title to the
property of which it sought to take pos
session in this manner, and asserted that
the alleged encroachments had existed for
years. They requested that the city be
restrained and enjoined from carrying out
its declared intention. Based upon this pc
titigU n nv V7aI
ligant requiring the Mayor and aldermen
TO appear before him on July II 10 show
cause why the prayer of the petitioners
should not be granted
On the same day that the order was
granted it was reported to the Mayor that
further encroachments had been added
by the Sacks, completely closing Lincoln
street. After consulting with the city at
torney Mayor Myers directed the director
of public works, the city engineer and
the city marshal to remove the new en-
croachments added by the owners, but
not to modest the fences which had been
in existence previous to the order of the
court. This order was executed, all the
officials named and several OF their as
sistants being on hand. Mr.. Henry Sack
was there, and entered his positive protest
against the proceeding but to no avail.
The fence was literally torn up by the
roots so to speak, and the holes in which
This completed the second chapter of
the story. The third was enacted yester-
day afternoon when Attorney LaRoche
appeared before the court and obtained an
order requiring the Mayor and aldermen
and all the officials connected with the af-
fair to appear next Saturday to show cause
why they should not be ruled for contempt
for disobeylng the restraining order OF
the court,
The petition presented to the court by
Mr.. LaRoche stated that on June %
restraining order, directed to the Mayor
and aldermen, had been passed, restrain
ing them, until the further order of the
court, from removing the fences described
in the petition, and that a copy of the
order had been served upon the city at
torney.
THAT on June a. the Mayor of said
town, Herman Myers, under the advice of
the said city attorney, S. B. Adams, d.
rected the following city officials to-wit:
John Power, city marshal; w. j. Winn,
city engineer; deBruyn Hops, assistant
city engineer; Geo. NJ. Gadsden, direc-
tor of public works, to proceed TO the prop
erty and to demolish the fence described,
and that acting under said direction the
said city officers did, on the afternoon of
said day, tear down and demolish all the
fence enclosing the property of petitioners.
situate east and west of the open portion
of Lincoln street and north of the open
portion OF Second street"
The petition further states that the or
der of the court expressly restrained the
Mayor and aldermen from interfering
with the fence, that they had received
notice of it. and that before the fence was
destroyed Mr.. Sack had personally pro-
tested against the destruction of the fence
and had put the officers directly on notice
that the restraining order of the court for
babe such interference.
~ 4ha fnf6r ~.
was granted, requiring the Mayor and
aldermen and all the officials named to
show cause why they should not be ruled
for contempt for disobedience of the order.
City Attorney Adams, when informed
Of the order that had been granted by the
court expressed great surprise that such
a step should have been taken by Mr..
LaRoche.
My connection of the matter was sim
ply this" said Mr.. Adams. II was in
formed by parties residing in Mr.. Sacks
neighborhood that he had erected addition
al fencing Friday morning The order of
the court requiring the Mayor and alder
men to appear on July IL to answer Mr.
Sacks petition was granted on Friday
morning, July %. The petition, however
was sworn to on July q, and / was under
the impression at the time that the or
der was granted on that date
When consulted by the Mayor
action l informed him that he had the
authority to order such encroachments
as had been made by Mr.. Sack subsequent
20 the granting of the order removed, but
that such encroachments as existed at
the time of the granting of the order
should be allowed TO remain in statu quo
AS a matter of fact the order which il is
claimed has been disobeyed, is not re-
straining order. and there is nothing in
ii to prevent the Mayor from carrying out
! his original intention as expressed In the
notice 10 MIR. Sack of removing all of the
encroachments at the points in dispute
The order only requires the Mayor and
aldermen to appear to show cause why a
restraining order should not be granted.
A date having been set for a hearing of
the matter, however, l thought il 10 be
due the court that the status quo should
remain until the court had had an oppor-
tunity to pass upon the question. Such
entertainments as had been made subse-
| quent 10 the granting of the order could
| be properly removed by the officers of
the city without diseourtesy 10 the court"
| Mr. Adams was evidently much cha
grinea that he should have been made