The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1902-05-20

Cn0 west LackaWanna Avenue via.
duct Is Reversed and the Bill Dis
missed-Findings Affirmed in the
Cases Of Kraft Against Neuffer,
Taylor Borough Against the Pos
tai Telegraph Company, Reynolds
Against Boland and Cameron
Against Gray.
The Supreme court at Philadelphia
yesterday handed down the following
Lackawanna county decisions:
Keller against the City Of Scranton, ct al
decree reversed and bill directed to be dismissed
with costs.
Borough Of Taylor against the Postal Telegraph
company, appeal from tho superior court; iudg.
ment affirmed on the opinion OF Judge Rice, Of
the superior court.
Kraft against Neuficr, ct al; decree affirmed.
Cameron, ct al. against Gray, ct al; decree
affirmed.
Reynolds against Boland, ct al; decree affirmed.
The case of Keller against the city
Of Scranton ct al. is the one involving
the building of the West Lackawanna
avenue viaduct.
The city passed an ordinance, Nov.
IL. 1900, providing for the construc-
tion of the viaduct, the expense of
actual construction to be borne by the
Delaware, Lackawanna and Western
Railroad company and the Scranton
Railway company. and the city to be
responsible for any resultant dam
ages.
Luther Keller, a property holder
along the line of the proposed improve
ment, brought a suit in equity to re-
strain the building Of the viaduct un-
til the city gave him naturalization
for damages that might be caused his
property.
ATTACK ON ORDINANCE.
He attacked the ordinance on tech
nical grounds, but his principal con-
tention was that the debt of the city
at that time already equalled two per
cent. of the assessed valuation and
could not be further increased without
the consent of the voters.
He contended that by assuming LA
bility for the damages, the city was
increasing it's debt by at least 100000,
the minimum figure, it was estimated,
the damage would amount to.
The defense contended that possible
damages, or an unascertained liability,
was not a debt" such as was contem-
plated in the law limiting the debts Of
municipalities.
Judge Kelly decided that the word
"debt" was used in the constitution,
in this instance, in it's technical mean
ing, and, consequently. the unascer-
tained damages that would result from
the building of the viaduct could not
be computed as part of the city's debt
He refused the injunction, and Mr.
Keller appealed.
The Supreme court chose to give the
word it's natural and ordinary mean
ing, instead of it's legal meaning, and
reversed the finding of Judge Kelly.
Judge Kelly thereupon entered a de-
cree in accordance with the Supreme
courts ruling, awarding to the plain
tiff the injunction preventing the con-
struction Of the viaduct
The city and the co-defendant COM
panies took second appeal. They
up in the Keller appeal namely, that
in ascertaining the indebtedness of a
city, the Indebtedness incurred by con-
cluded. Part of the city's debt was
authorized by the electors and part was
incurred by councils. without the cleo
tors consent. If the part authorized
by the electors was subtracted from
the city's debt, it would decrease the
debt far enough below the two per cent.
limit to permit of the city taking on
the possible damages resulting from
the viaduct construction.
The Supreme court. according to
City Solicitor Watsons Interpretation
of the telegraphic account of the de-
cision, reverses the decree which Judge
Kelly made at the direction of the
Supreme court, in which he awarded
the injunction he previously had re-
fused. This would permit of the build
ing of the viaduct under the old ordi-
nance.
BOLAND CASE.
The opinion of Judge II. NJ. Edwards
is affirmed in the equity case of H. b.
Reynolds against William p. Boland.
Plaintiff and defendant We're stock
holders in the Peoples Coal company,
which was organized in this city sew
eral years ago. Reynolds alleges that
1t was deemed advisable for him to get
out OF the company for a time. because
Samuel Stetler, who owned portion
of the coal the company contemplated
mining. did not like him and refused to
have business dealings with him. He
therefore transferred his stock to
Boland to be held by him until he
OReynolds) could again take his place
In the company after the deal with
stetler had been consummated. Boland
said that Reynolds got out of the COM
pany entirely, and that he held no stock
IN trust for him. Judge Edwards, be-
fore whom the case was tried, decided
In favor of Boland. and the Supreme
court yesterday said that he was cor
rect. Major Everett Warren and T.. C.
Newcomb were the attorneys for the
plaintiff, and Attorneys Joseph O'Brien
and Herman Osthaus, of this city, and
John II. Lenahan. of Wilkes Barre. an
peared for MIR. Boland.
In the case of William Kraft against
Charles d. Neuffer and Mrs. Minnie
Kraft, another of Judge Edwards de-
cisions, was sustained by the Supreme
body. In 1878 William Kraft and his
wife made a deed of the property at
the southeast corner of Jefferson ave-
nue. and Linden street to their son, Jo-
seph, and their daughter, Elizabeth,
each to have a half interest, the par
ents to have a life interest In the prop
erty
Joseph, the son, married Miss Minnie
Myers and subsequently died, leaving a
child, which also died. Joseph Kraft's
mother died short time after he was
Beware of n Couch.