The Redwood gazette. [volume] (Redwood Falls, Minn.) 1873-1940, 1901-05-29
L ORD r
Sundown and Three Lakes Farmers
Want Pay for Land TAX
en for 4 Road.
They Claim that Commissioners
Did Not Proceed Accord
ing to Law.

The county commissioners are
likely to have all kinds Of litigation,II
on their hands as a result OF its at
tempt to lay out the township |
line road between Three Lakes and {
4 Some time ago the commissioners
went ahead. and ordered the road
laid out, and after issuing the order.
they commenced TO appraise the
damages to adjoining land, with thejl
result that but very few Of the prop
erty owners received anything for.
the land thus attempted to be taken.
The road order calls for the stand
ard gauge of four rods in width, and
by reason of the order every owner
Of quarter section tract along the
proposed highway will be relieved
of two acres Of land, and the owner
OF a section tract will be relieved Of
four acres.
AS soon as the property owners
observed that the county proposed
to make the seizure without paying
for the seized property, according
to the owners idea of the value,
they commenced to oainquire into the
legality Of the procedure, and as a
result last Wednesday and Thurs
day three cases were commenced IN
the district court to reverse the ac-
tion Of the board and vacate the road
order, and in case the court refuses.
to reverse the action and Vacate the
order, the court is asked to compel
the commits ssioners to pay the own.
ers Of the land in two cases at the.
rate Of $1O0 for each acre taken by
them, and III the third case at the.
rate. of $3.50 per acre.
| One of*the cases was commenced
by A. Benhanl, the owner Of the
southwest quarter Of section 81,
Three Lakes. His attorneys are
I Messrs. Bowers s. Howard. The
notices in this appeal were served
on Thursday The other two ac-
tions have been commenced through
the law firm of Somerville & Olson
|sof Sleepy Eye, and the papers IN
both Of these cases were. filed with
/ the clerk of court on Wednesday.
I The first plaintiff is Fred. Held dbrak,
who owns the northeast quarter Of
section 1 SundoWp, at the north
east corner of which section the road
is due to commen ce. The other
! plaintiff is Lula NJ. Ober, the owner
4 of allof section 36, Three Lakes.
In all three cases the attorneys
/ allege that the action and order Of
/ the county commissioners is illegal
and void, BY reason Of their order
/ and determination to take the pri-
vate property of the appellants for
| public use without Offering reason
able ompensation therefor is
also alleged that no notice Of the
time and place Of the meeting Of the
committee from the commissioners
TO examine the proposed road was
lever given, and that no public hear
| ing was really ever given, or notice
of an intend ed meeting posted, upon
the petition to lay out the road.
Fred. Heidbrak owns two acres
which the county proposes to take
IN laying out the road. and his
prayer is that the action Of the COM
missioners be reversed and the orr
der vacated, and in case that this
is not done he be granted $500 COM
pensation, or $l00 per acre, bY rea-
son Of the land SO tax en- and the in
Ijury done to the remainder of the
farm. Lula N, Ober offers the same
pray with the exception that ia
Lease the action Of the commissioners
IFS not reversed she be granted $40o
for the four acres takes from her
section Of land and the damage that
will be done to the remaining q tract
By reason Of the proposed seizure.
AS previousl stated Mr.. Benham,
AS not quite SO modest il his de-
Imands, he asking $500 for the two