Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1901-05-08
Thinks the Editor mistaken.

Editor Willmar TRIBUNE: .s ..s.
q In your last ISSUE Of the TRIBUNE
you had an editorial about the Foot
Lake dump, and I hope you will kind
" grant me space for Q few remark,
thereon. szs 81 q
+ In zyour comments on Section Ii. Of
the committees findings yon say that
"the county commissioners had good
legal advice to the effect that the law.
was worthless at the time of the insti-
tuition OF the road Now I wish to
say that you are mistaken on that
point. There was nothing said about
it, but a good deal was said about a
special law for the village of Willmar
that was thought to protect the village
from any special assessments, but this
special law was found to be repealed
as far as the road law was concerned.
If those who afterward put in the re-
against the road had any
idea that the law was worthless, why
should they put in their best efforts to
have the road located further east so
as to enter the village in the Third
ward? They failed in this because
they could not get enough signers to
their petition; and another thing, some
of the landowners objected to having
it there. Still, { if remember right,
the viewers and civil engineer went
over that route but found it to be
more costly one. You say that the
sighers to the petition which was Fl
nally granted had been obtained un-
der all kinds of pretexts; in other
words, they did not know what they
were signing. That seems a rather
hard statement when we consider that
there were some over lao signers on
the petition, most of them business
men of Willmar. Lean inform you
that I have asked a good many of
them about this, and they all knew
very we'll what they were doing. Now
compare the number of signers on the
petition with only 81 signers on the re-
monstrance,-those who wanted the
road to enter further east-and think
anyone can figure out whether the
commissioners used poor Judgment or
not. At the hearing on the petition
before the commissioners both sides
had the best legal counsel, and after
arguing all the points the question as
to the probable cost of road was dis
cussed, one side claiming that it could
be done for less than $1,000, and the
other thought it would be q good deal
more. Finally counsel for the oppos-
ing side solved the problem by giving
the commissioners this advice: sIf
you can make the road for s., 900 or
less I would advise you to 60 ahead"
Mind you, this was the advice of
counsel for the opponents and still
you are talking about good legal ad-
vice.
Now another thing. If the oppo-
nents to the road were so sure that the
law was unconstitutional, why did
they wait so long time before max
ing an appeal to court? I asked some
of them time and again If they intend
ed to make one that they do it before
any work was done in order to save
the large expense. Oh, no; they fig
ured out differently. They all wanted
the road completed, but just as soon
as that was done, and the commission
ers were about issuing bonds and
levying assessments, then they OBJ
tanned an injunction and thereby
stopped all proceedings as far as the
commissioners were concerned. l sus-
pected then and subsequent events
have proved it to be so that they want
ed to place ali the cost on the county.
It seems to be the regular order to
place all expenses of road cases, ditch
cases and saloon cases on the county
at least everything that would affect
Willmar. PETER SKoGLUND.
1900 bushels of Oats which can be
used for seed, for sale by Peter
Bonde. E=. g. II