The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-09-17

lots or other tracts of land in any sec
tion lying adjacent to said borough
and ii was doubtless intended I'm a
certain case to place similar power
in the hands of the court" Clark, j.,
i'm Camphill Borough, 1i2 Pa. 5lI. Here
we have a tract of land embracing
lands of different adjoining owners
and the tract or territory as a whole
is adjacent to the borough of Taylor
1t is, In our opinion, such a tract of
land as may be annexed to a borough
under the terms of the act.
The other exceptions. among others,
as to the eXpediency of the proposed
annexation, found i'm the exceptions of
the township, filed on May &, and In
the exceptions of the school district.
filed on May s, are all overruled. IL
was the duty of the court to refer that
question to the grand jury at least in
the first instance, which was accord
ingly done.
The first third and fourth excep-
tiOnS to the report of the grand jury
are general in character and require
no specific discussion. In the second
exception it is complained that the
hearing was not conducted according
to the rules of evidence, and that in
competent CVidcnCewaS submitted and
admitted before the grand jury. 1t is
not alleged that the eXCeptants were
not fully heard. We are not Informed
as to what particular evidence was
enormously received. We have no rec
ord of the proceedings before the
grand jury. We cannot regard such
a general and sweeping exception as
this.
In addition to filing the exceptions
above noted to the finding of the grand
jury, counsel for eXceptants also petit
tion the court for a further investi-
On N firGt
presented they again complain that at
| the hearing before the grand jury the
rules of evidence were not adhered TO.
BEFORE THE GRAND JURY.
AS we have already stated we cam
not take note of this complaint. The
| act of assembly provides that the mat
ter he heard by the grand jury. Par
| ties on either side had a right to be
| present, with the assistance of COun-
| sci. and to be heard
| They had the right to offer such OBJ
| lection to the evidence offered as they
might see tit and the objections would
| have tn be ruled upon by the grand
| jury, the tribunal to which the law re-
fcrs the matter. There is no provision
made for the court to review these
| rulings upon such a matter as this.
| The second reason presented is hut
| a repetition of the third. fourth, sew
| cnth and eighth exceptions originally
| filed by the school district. which we
have already considered i'm disposinG
| of those exceptions, and requires no
further discussion. The fourth and
last reason assigned for further in-
| VeStigation is without reference TO the
eXpedienCy of the proposed anneXa-
| ton.
1t is true that the report of the
| grand jury is not conclusive upon this
|
frmed by the court. But if the court
shall deem further investigation nec-
essary they may take such order
thereon as to right and justice shall
appertain."
But as we view the matter the bur.
den is upon those who oppose the an
neXatiOn to satisfy the court that JUS
tice requires that some further inves'
tigatiOn be made, This has not beer
done. They merely allcge generally
that it is ineXpedient to grant tht
prayer of the petitioners. No deposi'
tiOns We're taken except upon the
question of the ownership of the lands
in the territory to be annexed, and rs
location and situation with reference
to the borough If Taylor.
OPPOSITION LOCATED.
The opposition to the annexation
comes entirely from the township anC
school district, not a single resident o
land owner i'm the territory to be an
neXed appears in opposition. Almos
all the resident free-h holders haV,
joined in the application.
The proposed application was prop
erly advertised. 1t is not anywhere al
legged that the application was no
signed by "a majority of the free hold
ers residing within the limits to b,
annexed" There is no allegation ol
the part of the eXceptants that the,
were not accorded a fun hearing be
fore the grand jury. Nothing has beer
called to our attention which in ou
judgment would require any furthe
investigation. We, therefore, oVerrul
the exceptions, refuse the petition 70
further investigation, and confirm tn
report of the grand jury
Let formal decree be submitted b,
! counsel