The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1905-12-08
This Is Only Up to the Appeal
from Lochren's Decision.
Balance Will Depend Somewhat
On Outcome of the Case.
Council Starts Franklin School
Sewer Over Again.


night C. n. Andrews and A. Z. Clark
presented their bill for services in as
sisting the city attorney in the asphalt
cases. The BILL which was for 81 6l609,
was only partial one. The main items
were the following:
"To legal services in case of Barber
Asphalt Paving company VS.. city, in
Guiding retainer, preparation and trial
of case in United States circuit court
and all services rendered therein up to
the filing of the decision of the trial
court, $1,000.
''To legal services in case of Patterson
ct al VS.. Mankato ct al, in full, $780,"
A. E. Clark's expense account was rem
derei at $l6525, and C. N. Andrews as
Sl5OS4. From the total of $l,6l6.O0
was deducted 5000 cash heretofore paid
to Mr.. Andrews, and $26.75 cash paid to
Mr.. Clark The balance was $l,3S9.34,
which the two attorneys said was due
them from services and expenses up to
the time of the filing of the decision
bv Judge Lochren. Since then they have
taken the appeal to the United States
court of appeals.
The bill was talked over informally
before the meeting of the council, Mr.
Andrews explaining it. He said that the
former council had engaged the services
of himself and Mr.. Clark, and in talking
over the probable expense they had
minated that $500 each might be about
right. There had been an enormous
amount of work involved, and they con-
sidered the charge reasonable one
When engaged they did not know any
thing about the Patterson case, and did
not expect to be called into that. They
would leave the matter to the council,
but had presented the bill as being a
lust one. The charge would not have
been made lighter for private individ-
ual. Judge Lochren almost always de-
cides his cases at once, but in the Bar
Der case he did not do so for six months
and then lodged every legal point in
the case by saying that the pavement
had been laid and should be paid for.
On the other hand the Minnesota SUI
preme court upheld the city flatfooted
on every phase of the case.
Alderman Atchison asked whether
this was all the bill that would be rem
dered
Mr.. Andrews replied that it was not,
This bill only took the case up to the
appeal. Many things may come up in
the future in connection with it.
The aldermen thought that the bill
should be made out to the present time.
so that the council could conclude the
agreement made by the last council and
enter into new one of its own max
ing, or get along without further assist
ance.
Mr. Andrews said that they would
not like to do this, as it was their in
tention to put in a good additional
charge if the city won the case finally
but if it lost they. intended to make only
small further charge.
When the bill was presented in open
session, it was referred to the commit
tee on claims and accounts, and it was
decided that the entire bill should be
presented The intention is to allow
the bill made out on the basis that the
city will be defeated. Then if the city
wins, an additional sum will be voted tt
the attorneys, in accordance with thu
usual practice.
Not very much business came up il
open session. The most important mat
ter was that relating to the construc
ton of sewer to the Franklin school
The council rescinded all former actor
in regard to this, upon the advice o.
the city attorney and the board of pub
lie works, and started the matte
through the channel anew. The matte
was referred to the board under orde
No. / under public necessity resolu
ton. A recess was taken and the boarc
retired and soon brought in a report
President Porter explained that unde
the former proceeding the city was to di,
the first four feet of the excavation
and the contractors had said that thi
excavation should be ten or twelve fee
wide. 1t was evident that the city an
the contractor would never be able t
agree, the contractor saying that tn
city ought to make its excavation
little deeper here or there, etc. 1t wa
thought best to let the whole exca
walton to the contractor, and for the cit
to pay fixed sum from the waterwork
fund for the privilege of laying the wat
er pipes in the same excavation. Their