The Vinita weekly chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1902-1905, 1904-02-04
WATERWORKS
SITE IN COURT
Injunction Asked Against Use
OF North Park.
UP NEXT WEDNESDAY
Decision Of Judge SanbOrn in
the Original Park Case
is Largely Basis of
Application.
UP NEXT WEDNESDAY
Decision Of Judge SanbOrn in

The waterworks station location
matter went into court last week,
on an application for an injunction
against the use OF North Park for that
purpose. The application Is brought
IN the name or on behalf Of Oliver
Bagby, w. r. Halsell, Louis Bagby,
Frank Burckhalter, Mary J.lBrowning
and r. A. Chandler, for themselves
and for and IN behalf of other citizens,
taxpayers and residents OF the city OF
Vinlta.
II is directed against Allan Black
Co., contractors; +. J. Spriggs, secre-
tary Of the company, and the city Of
Ninita.
Messrs Kornegay, Parker and Davis
represent the petitioners.
The notice Of intention to ask for an
injunction included, also, South Park,
but the formal application did not
mention that, doubtless for the reason
that there would be no cause for at
tempting TO utilize that location II
the courts decision was adverse as TO
the other.
Briefly, the contention Of the petit
tioners is that a waterworks plant is
not desirable neighbor in the resi-
dence section of the city, and is not
one calculated TO enhance the value of
residence property. Further, their at
torneys insist that such use of the
parks Is not within the intent OF Che
law.
IN reply TO the suggestion that the
purpose IN waiting until this time,
when active operations we're TO begin,
was 70 retard the work, the petition
ers stated that they had not untll
this week, had definite information of
the Intended use Of tile park for the
purposes named; that no ordinance or
other act OF .he council disclosed this
purpose, and that the information
was only just secured and sthat from
the contractor,
4 meeting Of the city council was
he ID Thursday to consider the sub
jecis and it Is reported that decision
was reached to ask Of the city attor.
ney, and Of Edgar Smith, OF counsel In
this case, an opinion ofthe city's rights
IN the matter, and to be largely guild
ed thereby IN their further actions In
the premises.
Both sides appear sincere in a dec
laration In favor Of prompt action
that there isno wish 70 delay the work.
Upon presentation Of the application
this morning Judge Gill set next
Wednesday for hearing arguments on
the same, which IS as early as should
be expected.
Tie petitioners base their hope OF
Justification Of the position taken very
largely upon the Vlnita park case
known In the hooks Is Davenport vs..
Burlington, with Which our citizens
are more or less familiar
In that famous park case. Of some
years since. Judge sanborn. in an
opinion delivered At ST. Paul. October
l6 1859, says as summed up in the
syllabus.
|. A resident and I taxpayer OF n
city OF town may maintain suit IN
equity to prevent the diversion 70 pri-
yate use by the original proprietor Of
the town site d land which, when the
town WIS lad OUT and plated, was
dedicated As public park. and las
since been aiaiutainnd Is such.
, A nati0n state Or municipality, |
which dedleates land within town
site. Of which it IS owner. 10 public
use for park purposes IS a. exclusively
esiopped As 4 private proprietor from
revoking such dedication from selling
the park, and from approprlatlng the
land which II occupies to other pur.
poses, after lots haze been sold. the
town settled. and after the park has
been improved with money raised by
taxation Of ifs residents and taxpayers
IN reliance upon the grant and cosen-
ant which the dedication evidences
Exchanges Wanted. a position In
printing Office; prefer makeup and ad
setting. Six years practical experience
IN oiice work. Editor Miami Repub-
lean until recent sale Bertha Eagles,
rhayer, Kansas w-2-w
Help he Neeay.
The Relief Union needs llnney with
which 70 relieve suffering among somc