Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1905-02-17
SUTTON ON PAVING.
Continued From Seventh Page.y


CONTINUED From Seventh Page.)
Ninth street, representing a frontage
of l,S55 feet out of II total of 2,169 feet
frontage to be paved. filed similar pc
titions and remonStranceS against the
paving. This makes a grand total of
property owners owning 1862 feet
frontage out of a total of 1889 feet
frontage to be paved. who have taken
every means in their power to impress
upon the council the fact that the inn
provements contemplated were not de-
sired by them. These petitions are all
on file in the city clerks office with
/ the exception Of the one relative to
Church street, which is in the county
clerks office among the exhibits in the
Calhoun case.
Shortly after the filing of these petit
tons the council met, on May Is, 1903.
and passed the final resolution order
ing Lincoln, Grant. State and Ninth
streets paved. in the face of these re-
monstrances. the vote being Abbott,
Arnold, Good. Greene. Henry, Ingledue.
kreutzer, Mcbride, Psenicka and Web
ster all in its favor. These proceedings
aiS SCI u II lIllIlile Dooh. III. at page
1863, in the city clerks office. On MAY
IS. 1903. the council met and ordered
| Church street paved in face of the re-
monstrances filed, the vote being TAX
en- the same as above, with the excep-
ton of MIR. kreutZer who voted against
1t, and Messrs. Abbott and Greene who
We're absent. These proceedings Will
be found in minute book 10. page 1O5,
aforesaid. On May 25, 1903, property
owners on Church street represents
ing a frontage of $685. feet out of 800
feet, filed a petition asking thai the
street be paved with brick instead OF
asphalt, after the council had deter
mined the street should be paved.
There appears to be no record of any
action of the council looking to a con-
sideration of the merits of this petit
ton.
Why is it that the property owners
on Second avenue can petition for a
change in the class of paving, first to
have it changed from asphalt to brick
and have it granted, and then petition
to have it changed again from brick
to asphalt. and ave the petition grant
ed, even after bids had been advertised
for the brick paving, while the proper
ty owners on Church street can NOT
even get their petition to have brick
paving instead of asphalt receive even
decent considerations? Is it necessary
to suggest that at that time a council
man resided on Second avenue. while
no councilman resided on Church
street?
Now it can be said that petitions and
Inconsistencies against an improve
ment signed by 50 per cent of the per-
sons directly affected, can be anything
less thar an expression of the attitude
of the public in general? If the peo-
pie who have to assume the burden of
this expense are to have it thrust upon
them. regardless of their attitude, es-
p%ecially in the face of such an over
whelming majority against the i'm
provement, does it not amount to moth
ing more or less than co%nfiscation.
would take the position that the wishes
and desires of 50 per cent of the own
ers of frontage on the street to be paw
ed, should not be given very great
If so, is it not somewhat of
q perilious position to own property
in this city? | submit, in all perfect
is it not a general conclusion
that the right of petition to our CITY
is a joke?
Take for instance the matter of the
Sixth ward controversy. Was ever
a fragrant insult of the most de-
character flung in the face OF
American citizen as at the two
meetings Of the city council, when the
-oters appeared to exercise their SOW
right of petition? What con-
fusion can be drawn from the actions
If those voting to exterminate this
yard in the face of public opinion.
than the firm determination 70
IMPRESS upon the public that they care
lot so much as the snap of a finger for
the petitions n arguments which
he private citizen might submit.
! deem it the duty of the public to
acknowledge the fairness of those
ouncilmen who needed the disires of
hese people and who voted against |
he ordinance. Messrs. Abbott, Ar
old and Calhoun. being members out- {
ide of the Sixth ward, are deserving /,
f thanks and Endorsement for the de-
they have taken. On the con-
rary. those who voted in its favor, I
III dS my lliNalc opliiloil. are Qe-
of the utmost condemnation. {
In the face of this utter disregard !,
f public opinion. in the face of the 7
stounding revelations in connection n
18th the paving which this council has
us. is it not the duty of the public
} speak out openly and freely and
base the Objectionable encumbents \
Ito political oblivion? Let this abuse e
f power, as manifested In the paving
nd the Sixth ward issues. be pounded i
and night. Keep an eye out for Y
ne fine Italian hand. with a grip on /
is stilletto. that is hidden beneath the Y
of these modern Caesars in
1eir attempt to steal other peoples =
thunder by ordering an ordi-
ance to abolish the fee system. and in Il
leir pose as public benefactors. in an n
to magnify the shortcomings
{ their main opponent for the mayor II
in giving n correct LIST of his taxes n