Decorah public opinion. (Decorah, Winneshiek County [Iowa]) 1895-1928, 1901-10-09
LITIGATION AT ESTHERVlLE.
An Iowa City Involved In Financial
Complications.

Des Moines Leader, Sept. 18:-E, R.
Acres, of DEBORAH and j. q. Myeriy, OF
this city, We're at the state house yester-
day taking dispositions relating to an
important suit in which the city of
Estherville and its tax payers are con-
cerned. Messrs. Acres and Myerly are
attorneys in this case, the former hav-
ing been retained by interested tax
payers.
In May last the city of Estherville
had bonded indebtedness of $50, 600
besides about s. 900 in outstanding
warrants. There was no money on
hand TO pay for them and but about
$4,000 in revenue was being received
from all sources to pay the running eX-
penses of the city. The Indebtedness
was about double the limit of the in.
debtedness permitted by the law fol
+ such city. There had been an cleo
trio light plant costing about 50, 900 es,
tablished ia Estherville some years be-
fore. Last May the city council de-
cided to build a new one costing IN
round numbers Sl3, 900 and contracted
the various firms accordingly, tore
down the old plant and commenced
a new structure.
The taxpayers have commenced pro
ceedings to enjoin the city from build
ing the plant or carrying out the con
tracts or issuing warrants to pay the
contractors. The difficulty has aroused
much local interest.
Another action in which the city o
Estherville is concerned is attracting
the attention of attorneys Throughout
the state. In 1899 the city of Esther
vile was in debt 81 900 beyond the con
stitutional limit. The city had NJ
ready money and wanted to aid rail
road proposition. The council caused
to be issued warrants on the city to thu
amount of Sl2, 900 and sold them to var
ious parties.
The mayor and most of the member
of the city council subscribed for war
rants to the sum of 500 to $500 eacf
and got them. The warrants wer
then presented to the city treasurer anC
not paid for want of funds. The war
wants were then put into the hands o
one party who brought an action OF
them for all concerned. 1t is ALLEGED
the city attorney was about to inter
pose defense to this on the ground tn,
warrants were void. The city council
however, passed resolution instruct
ing him not to defend. The result o
this was the obtaining of a judgment
against the city by default for $4,000
This Judgment was permitted to stant
for about year. Then the city coun
Gil issued bonds for $4,000, sold them
got the money and paid the judgment
Then the mayor and several member
of the council went to the distric
court clerk and receipted for thei
share of the money evidenced by thu
warrants they held.
Now taxpayer of the city has com
mended action in equity in Emme
county to cancel the bonds and ask
that in event the bonds cannot be can
celed or their payment enjoined, tina
IA sapersonal judgment be obtained
against the mayor and the members o
the council who worked the dea
through, for the full face value of til,
bonds. A number of attorneys are in
terested, including Messrs. Acres anC
Myerly, who were taking deposition
i'm the case first mentioned at the stat
house yesterday. Mr.. Acres is on tn,
side of the prosecution and Mr.. Myerly
OH the side of the defense