The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1907-11-21
Market Street Property Owners
Are Not Satisfied With the
Jones Paving Contract
CLAIM CONTRACT is ILLEGAL
Consult Attorneys and May Seek to Pre-
vent Any Work Being Done on
Contract Granted to Johno.
Jones Monday Evening

The fight over the contract for the
paving of the half dozen streets
which was let to John o. Jones of Ra-
cine, by the vote of the council on
Monday evening, is not as yet over
and the city and John 0. Jones may
be enjoined from making the contract
or doing any work under it. The con.
tract had not been signed this morn
ing, but it is thought that it will
be signed by Mayor German and the
City Clerk before the day is over.
The contractor has already resumed
the work of paving Fremont avenue
and the work is being pushed as rap
idly as possible. The movement to
enjoin Jones from doing the work or
from collecting any pay for work
done under the contract was started
by residents on Market street, who
were opposed to the pavement of the
street and the attorneys swho were
asked to take up the matter on Tues
day may have the injunction issued
by some court commissioner before
the end of the week.
One of the protesting property own
ers was seen this morning and in
speaking of the matter he declared
that he was convinced thatsthe coun-
Gil had no right under thealaw to let
the contract to Jones on account of
the fact that it was clearlyashown on
the face of the bids that he was not
I the lowest bidder for the contract.
The explanation of the members of
the council in regard to the railway
company being the real person
'stuck" under the contract did not
seem to appeal to the property owner
in question. He declared that the
men leading in the movement to en-
join the city would urgesthe further
grounds that the council had no right
to let the contract tosany bidder on
account of the fact that the petition
on which the contract was ordered did
--t the requisite amount of front
age.
| It is not thought that this last OBJ
| lection to the contract would hold
good, as the petition on which the
contracts were ordered had the sig
natures of a large percentage of the
property owners. The fight over the
paving of Market street was a long
one, and in the long fight several pc
titions were presented, but it is under
stood that when the last petition was
presented it was an entirely new petit
ton containing no copied names. It
Sc ~EaS h So IF
the Rasmussen company was several
hundred dollars lower on the pave
lnent of Market street and Crane
avenue. As yet the sGrand ~ravenue
property owners haveznot taken any
steps to take part IN any injun ctiona1
proceedings. It is possible that the
injunction will not be served at this
time, but at the timeithe payment is
demanded for the pavement. If the
work is put IN attorneys consulted de-
clare that it would be possible for the
property owners to hold up the pay
ment of the tax for the work for some
time.
The statement of the Rasmussen
company that it would accept the con-
tract for Market street or any other
street on which it was low has caused
the people to take great interest in
the matter and it will probably be
some time before the matter is settled.
In the meantime it is not thought that
the people of Fremont avenue will
protest against Jones doing the work,
as all of them are anxious to get the
street paved this year, and it is prob
able that if necessary they would be
willing to sign an agreement to pay
for the work regardless to the injunc-
ton brought against the contractors.