The Plymouth tribune. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1901-1911, 1907-05-02
Reply of Judge Hess to c. w.
Metsker. q

In the Independent OF April 27, Mr..
Metsker charges me with being the
author of the article which appeared
in the Tribune of April 26, answering
that most unsupported, unwarranted,
vicious and virulent personal attack
upon me and the city council which
i appeared in the Independent of April
25, entitled Partisan Council" Mr.
Metsker in the Independent of April
q, says that | had no facts to sus-
tain and warrant what was contained
in that article and hence | made a
personal attack upon him as mere
subterfuge. | challenge Mr.. Metsker
to disprove by the record. the con-
tentions brought forward in that ar
ticle. What are the facts as shown
by the record to sustain and war
rant the statements in that answer !?
Mr.. Metsker says that my advice
has caused the council to advertise
twice for improvements, thereby pill
ing up costs to the parties interest
ed The bills filed with the city
clerk and the record of the council
prove this statement to be undeniab-
ly untrue He says the petty parti-
san conduct of the council has COM
PEELED the taxpayers to pay for two
advertisements when one should have
been sufficient" The bills on file
with the city clerk and the record of
the council prove this statement also
to be untrue and Mr. Metsker knew it
to be untrue when he- made it. He
says If the council should attempt TO
60 ahead with improvements after
having passed no legal resolution
fixing dates by resolution as the law
| directs there could be no legal sale
of bonds. The council has never at
tempted to GO ahead with improve
ments without passing declaratory
resolution" of necessity and fixing
therein the date and place when and
| where persons affected thereby might
demonstrate, as the records of the
council will show. In the resolutions
for North Walnut and North Mich
! igan street sewer improvements, the
time as shown by said resolutions.
was fixed for Monday evening, April
| % and the resolutions named the
| Chronicle as the paper in which
notice as required by law, should be
published ard these resolutions were
Unanimously adopted by the council,
and at that time no one whose lands
would be affected, demonstrated, and
the council then unanimously adopted
he final resolution, fixing May 18th
as the time when bids would be re-
.eived for said improvements and the
council directed, as it had the legal
right to do, that notice should be
published in the Plymouth Chronicle.
| In the case of Hughes VS.. Parker.
l4s Ind, page 692, the supreme court
of this state holds that street as
sessment was valid when no declar-
atory resolution had ever been pass
ed and no notice thereof given, as
required by law. In the case of the
Pittsburg, ETC., R. R. Co., VS.. Fish,
i5s Ind, page 526, the contention
was that no notice of the adoption
of the primary resolution of neces-
Isity had been given, as provided by
law, but the supreme court says that
Lit has been held that notice of the
resolution of necessity is not essen
tial to jurisdiction or to the validity
of an assessment In the case of
Barber Asphelt Paving Co. VS. Ed
gerton, 125 Ind, ass, the court holds
that in this state, the proceedings of
cities for street Improvements will
not be held void when there has been
an attempt to comply with the stat
1tory requirements, though such at
tempt does not amount to a strict
compliance with the statute, if the
city, in addition to its jurisdiction
lover the subject matter, acquires jur-
;sdiction over the persons to be af-
fected-
In the case of Brown VS.. Central
Bermudy Co., 162 Ind, 452, the court
says it is not the passage of the de-
claratory resolution which gives jur.
isdiction over the persons of the
property owners.
i These discussions of the supreme
, court sustain the council in the
course they have and are pursuing ir
, regard. to street improvements ir
this city.
, Because the council directs city ad
vertisements, as they have the lega
, right to do, to be published in othel
papers than those Mr. Metsker con
trolls, he says the taxpayers arr
: plunged into law suits and forced te
pay double advertising expenses il
order to crafty few hungry parti
: sans" This statement is absolutel,
5 untrue, for there are no law suit.
pending against the city, and Mr.
E Metsker knew that fact when h,
! made that statement. Why shoult
he make such reckless, downright
bare-faced false statements? Did h,
sunDose thev would on unanswered
= If he did he mistook the characte
and temper of the men whom he at
tackled in one of the most viru
vitrioiic discharges of unadulteratet
personal attacks that has ever beer
: published about any citizen of thi
city or county by any editor of an.
paper in this city. 1t was reLlet
unaduTterated, viciouJ villianou.