Arizona republican., 1901-03-08
ITS NAME WAS DENNIS
Last Addition Brought Into the Mu-
 nicipal Corporation.

The last of the corporation eases against the additions to the city was disposed of yesterday in the district court when jury of twelve good men, eleven of whom were of one mind, brought in a verdict in effect that the Dennis addition to the city of Phoenix ought to be part of the municipal corporation in order to serve the best interests of all concerned.
 City Attorney Bullard felt as proud as a peacock over the victory of him self and assistant counsel. Alexander, as they have worked hard for a long time on the case and against the prophecy of failure by many of their friends. 1t was the only matter com ing before the court yesterday and took up the entire day from the morn ing hours till late in the afternoon.
 The plaintiff had but one witness, George McFall, depending largely on the argumentative resources of the at toTneys to convince the Jury of the justice of the city's claim. The de- fense had several witnesses and during the course of their testimony and the arguments that followed some humor- ONS NninSo Npph PitlNNs anu NNiN t4ie more appreciated. for the reason that everything was good-natured.
 The defense seemed to rest its hope of success entirely on the argument that the citizens of Dennis addition did not want to be annexed to the city for the reason that they would have additional taxes to pay, ands several witnesses were placed on the stand to prove that the addition was sparsely settled. that they might not receive the benefits of municipal protection even after they were annexed. and that the time was not yet ripe for them to don metropolitan clothes.
 Judge Woodward, who conducted the defense, asserted that Dennis addition was country hamlet and that the res idents thereof were very poor, and most of them farmers. George Godfrey and w. B. Creager were called upon to testify as leading farmers in that rich agricultural region. and P. T. Burtis was called upon as another property owner who didn't want to be annexed. MT. Godfrey and Mir. Creager stoutly maintained that they had several acres in cereals and pasture, and metaphor ically pulled hay-seed out of their hair. But MT Burtis had not been properly coached.
 Asked if there was anything needed in Dennis addition. he replied that there was, and named a number of things. such as sewerage, electric lights and fire and police protection, which they could never hope to get without annexation. That was ducks for the plaintiff.
 In addressing the jury the counsel for the plaintiff called attention first to the fact that the question at issue was not whether the addition wanted to come in or whether the city wanted to bring it in. but whether it would be better for the city to have it brought in, and whether 1t would work any hardship on the residents to force it in.
 The points were then made that the city water works and the power house for the city railway, both of which get their patronage from the city, avoid the taxing of their plants by being out side. and that 1t was only fair that they contribute to the city's support. Fur ther that the most thickly settled part of the addition was near the water works and that the city should have the authority to protect the purity of it's water supply by constructing a