Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1903-08-19
DECISION OF CITY ATTY.
Gives His Reasons for Declaring Void
Electric Light Franchise Petition.

To THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF LANCAsTER:-Cer Certain
papers filed in the Office of the city
clerk on July 9th, 1903, relating to
the submission of an ordinance to
direct vote of all the voters of this
cts, are referred to me by you, for an
opinion as to their regularity and
validity. Said papers contain two
demands, each with signatures there
to attached, and one affidavit attached
to the back of the last demand, and
all of said papers are attached to-
gether. The first demand is followed
by eighty-on signatures, and the
second demand by forty-eight sig
natures. Said demands are alike, and
bosb read as follows:
"To the Mayor and Common Council
of the City of Lancaster: We the I'M
dersigned, qualified voters of the city
of Lancaster, demand that the or
dinance granting an extension Of the
electric light franchise which was
granted on the second day of June,
1908, and was an amendment to sec
ton two of chapter SO of the ordi-
nances of said city, be submitted to
direct vote of all the voters in said
CITY,"
This demand is undertaken to be
made pursuant to the provisions OF
chapter 307, laws of 1908, which pro-
vides for the submission of an ord1-
nance granting or extending an
electric lighting franchise to direct
vote of all the voters of any city, if
within sixty days from the date of the
passage thereof, as many as twenty
per cent of the number of voters at
the last preceding election shall de-
mand such submission. Section two
of said chapter prescribes the way
and manner in which such demand
shall be made and submitted, namely.
"In every such case the papers con-
tanning the demand for such direct
vote shall be filed with the city clerk
within the time specified, and each
signer shall write his occupation and
residence after his signature, and the
genuineness of the signers of each
paper must be affirmed by the affidavit
of qualified voter"
These papers are defective in the
following respects:
l. No such ordinance as is des-
cribed in said demands has ever been
passed by the city council. The ode
mand that the ordinance granting an
~ hn oil atrs0
franchise which was granted on the
second day of June 1908, and was an
amendment to section two of chapter
SO of the ordinance of said city, be
submitted to such vote. | cannot
find that any ordinance has been
passed for an extension of the franchise
granted June Ind, 1903, or in any way
amending section two of said chapter
SO of the ordinances of said city.
?. But if such an ordinance had
been passed, the affidavit attached co
these demands does not affirm the
occurrences of any signature thereto.
3. The affidavit attached TO said
two demands, relates by its term to
only one demand, and which one of
these two demands it relates to, it is
impossible to determine. It is to the
effect, that affiant sis personally ac-
quainted with all of the signers to
the attached demand, that they are
all electors of the city of Lancaster,
and that their residence and occupa-
ton are truly stated in such paper"
This substantially is the whole of the
affidavit.
5 Many of the signers of said de-
mand have failed to comply with the
requirement of said chapter 257, that
"each signer shall write his occupation
and residence after his signature"
If either or both demands could be
regarded as sufficient in other res
poets, there are not enough signers
thereon who have complied with this
requirement to amount to twenty per
cent of the number Of voters at the
last city election.
5. If said affidavit could be re-
garded as applying to either or both
of said dema nds,i it's allegation that the
residence and occupation of all such
signers are truly stated therein, is
falsified on the face of the papers, and
cannot therefore be regarded as OF
any validity.
[ notice other defects which need
not be specified. My opinion is, that
said papers referred to me do not
constitute valid demand for vote
of all the electors of this city upon any
ordinance passed by the city council,
and that any election attempted to be
held pursuant thereto, would be void
and of no effect.
Dated August 14th, 1908.
A. r. BUSHNELL, City Attorney.