Lewiston evening teller. [volume] (Lewiston, Idaho) 1903-1911, 1907-06-01
WOULD DISMISS
ISAMAN CASE
Engineer Chase Reports Cost
of Paving $l7S,OOO==.Use
Of BithulithiC

"PN SHt6 ~ 'lIc CouICll last HlSnL WneE
Alderman Morey made the statement
that the prosecution ct the case Of the
City of Lewiston VS.. S. G. Isaman was
being instituted for personal reasons
rather than to reimburse the city OF
determine a point at law
The remark of Mr. Morey was made
during discussion of a petition by a
number of taxpayers asking that the
case against Mr. Isaman be dismissed.
DO you mean that the prosecution
OF the case is a personal matter with
any of the members of the council %
asked Councilman Phillips.
Mr.. Morey stated he had no refer
ence to any member of the council
when he made the remark.
City Attorney Cox then asked for
the attention of the council and stated
that in as much as Mr.. Morey had ex-
onorated the members of the council
in his charge that it cast reflections
upon other parties identified with the
prosecution of the case and asked that
committee be appointeH before which
Mr.. Morey be asked to make specific
charges or complete statement as to
what he really intended to convey in
the remark that the prosecution of the
case was personal matter.
I will make such a notion" said
Mr.. Morey land also that City Attor-
ney Cox be instructed to attend the
meeting Of the committee before which
I make my explanation"
Mayor Heitfeld appointed Council
men Howard, King and Osmers to in
vestigate the matter.
The case of the city against Mr.. Isa-
man is the outcome of a damage suit
rought against the city several years
brought against the city several years
ago by Mrs. J. A. Mclean for injuries
received by falling on a defective side
Isaman. The case involves about ST.
700.
The report of Engineer w. B. Chase
was received showing the area of the
proposed paving district, the amount
of excavations, lineal feet of curling,
cutters and sidewalk. Mr.. Chase's re-
port estimated the cost of the entire
to be $75,s22.26. Compu-
tations by members of the council
showed the estimate of Mr.. Chase to
be far below the possible cost of the
pavement and before the adj
journment of the meeting he stated
that he believed an error had been
made In the computations and he
would make a check OF tue same. Uopn
going over the figures slight error
Of 100000 was discovered which
makes the estimated cost of the work
in the revised report to approximate
s17S.414 "A.
Mr.. Chase also made a report upon
the drainage for the flood waters and
the bitulithic pavement
as the best Off use in Lewiston. He
supplied plans for all characters of
pavement now used in the larger cities
and suggested the best drainage plan
to be the covered sewer system.
Contractor A. ]. Clarke, of the down.
town system, petitioned the council to
have the engineer survey the sewer
already constructed and that progress
certificates and warrants for the same
be. issued to the petitioner, Mr.. Clarke
explained that he had already adj
vanced a large amount of cash for the
work and would not be able to resume
the contract until such money is paid.
The sewer committee was authorized
to employ such assistance as is neces-
sary to transcribe the sewer rolls.
A complaint was filed against the
gas company on account Of a drain
pipe having been laid from the plant
to the Clearwater river through which
tar is conveyed to the river and de-
posted near the plant OF the Lewiston
Lumber company. The complaint was
filed by large number of residents of
the community effected.
The matter was referred to the
health committee.
An ordinance providing for the es-
adjustment Of water rates in accord
ance with the report OF Superintendent
Smith was introduced.
The council received and took under
the following petition
aslin that the case Of the city of
Lewiston vs.. 8, G. Isaman be dismiss
ed.
We. the undersigned taxpayers Of
the city OF Lewiston, would respect
fully petition your honorable body to
dismiss the suit against S. q. Isaman
as at the time the accident occurred
to Mrs. Mclean the city was then I'M
der q different charter and whichever
way the suit may be decided it viii
not be q test case under the present
charter and as s. @. Isaman was not
allowed to help defend in the case Of
Mclean VS.. City Of Lewiston. 1t seems
as an injustice to him to hold him re-
sponsible for the damages assessed
against the city in favor of Mrs. Nc
Lean and your petitioners win ever
pray: