Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1899-1903, 1903-08-04
ASKS INJUNCTION.
MILWAUKEE ROAD OBJECTS TO
ASSESSMENT ON NEW CUT
OFF LINE.

Petition Presented to United States
Circuit Court Raises New Issue -
Claim Council May Not Assess Line
Being Constructed.
A petition filed with Clerk E. R. Ma.
son of the United States circuit court,
by the officials of the Chicago, Mil
waukee & st. Paul railroad asks an or
der restraining Governor Cummins and
other state officials from certifying to
officers, in five counties through which
the new Milwaukee cutoff passes, the
assessment against the projected line.
The case involves taxes amounting to
$4,000 and will come before Judge w.
III. Sanborn Of st. Paul. Other state Of
ficials mentioned in the petition aside
from Governor Cummins are: Secre-
tary of State w. B. Martin, G. S. Gil
bertson, Beryl f. Carroll and III. Davis
on.
The case involves the Milwaukee
cutoff from Rutledge, just north of
this city, to Muscatine.
The plaintiff company claims the as.
sessment, which case involves the larg-
est OF tax, is amounting to over $25, 900,
would be unjust and urges the temper
airy restraining order on the ground
that the assessment may be certified to
the counties on the first Monday in
August, and that after such an act
there would be no way in which the
cloud thus placed upon the title of
the plaintiffs property could be remov.
| ed without payment in full.
Says Line lis Merely Projected.
| A copy of the petition was filed In Des
| Mones with the clerk and the original
was presented to Judge Sanborh at st.
| Paul. Judge Cook of Cedar Rapids, legal
representative for the company was in
| the city Thursday arranging for the filing
| here, and left Thursday night for st.
Paul to present his petition to the court
| there.
The piece of road is claimed to be merely
projected and with very little construc-
| tion upon it. The right of way has been
| purchased from Muscatine to Rutledge,
running through the counties of Musca-
| tine, Louisa Washington, Jefferson and
Wapello or portion thereof Some grad
ing has been done and n few miles of
iron was laid in Mnscatine county, but
line has been fully graded or the roadbed
prepared for ties and iron. or bridges
built before January i, 1903. No part of the
road built had been used by the railroad,
nor was it completed to permit use, it Is
claimed, and on this ground the company
believes assessment for the present year
is unjust
Allegations of the Petition.
The petitioner sets forth that on jan
nary 1, 1908, the company had projected
to run the line from Muscatine to Rut-
ledge, but had not completed it. 1t is
claimed the defendants in the action
| have fixed the value of the projected line
and have assessed it the same as a rail-
| road in operation and as the property of
the plaintiff used exclusively in the OPP
Grafton of n railroad on January /, 1903
1t is said the executive council and its
members are threatening to- unless re,
strained, on the first Monday in August,
to certify their findings and doings
to the several counties, to each county
the number of miles of the projected
railroad, for taxation purposes and for
the collection of state, county and
municipal taxes as though the line was
on January l, 1908, railroad in opera
ton.
IL is ayerred by the orator that under
the laws of the state. the defendants
have no authority to assess any property
of the orator within the counties of
Muscatine, Louisa, Washington or Jeffer-
son and have no real power or authority
to assess the projected line within the
county of Wapello. In the last named
county, the orator owns a line Of rail
road which has been in operation many
years. running from Marion, Iowa, to
Kansas City, Mo. If the assessment on
the projected road is certified it is claim
ed a confusion as to the property assess
ed will arise.
If the assessment is certified to the
counties there is no remedy at law, and
accordingly it is prayed that the defend
ant be restrained from certifying to the
value or assessment of the projected line
or any part of 1t. 1t is asked that III. Da-
wilson, as clerk, be enjoined from trans.
hitting certificates to any of the county |
officers, and upon final hearing it is |
prayed that the injunction be made per-
petua.
Was Argued Before Council.
The question involved in the Injunction
suit began yesterday by the Chicago. Mil |
waukee and st. Paul against the members
Of the executive council, was first consd-
cred in public way in the hearings be-
fore the council recently, on the subject
of railway assessments. AT that time, |
Judge ]. G. Cook, of Cedar Rapids, coun-
sci for Iowa for the Milwaukee, appeared
to show the council had no authority to
assess the line between Musdatine and
Ottumwa. He went over the question at
that period in the process of the trans
formation of property from farm land to
a railway, the property became subject
to assessment by the executive council
He contended the statutes of Iowa on the
subject of railway assessment by the ex-
ecutive council applied to complete rail-
road, one actually transporting rolling
stock, or in condition to do So
The point is new one, undecided by
the courts. Hitherto, the practice of the
executive council has been to assess I'M
completed railway lines at maximum of
Sc, 900 per mile. 1t is related mat the
late Judge Hubbard Of Cedar Rapids, was
once confronted with this proposition
Some of his Northwestern friends want
ed him to resist the assessment in the
courts. Now you just let this business
alone il you know when you're well off,"
said the judge, and there the incident
closed.
The same question concerns the Great
Western, In reference to its uncompleted |
line from Fort Dodge to Council Bluffs
At the time Of the railway assessment
hearings, Judge G. II. Carr Of Des
Moines, appeared before the council and
made an argument similar to that Of Judge