The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1909-08-05
Argument of the Fight on Paving
Market Street Heard by At.
torney Buckmaster
DONE AT SPECIAL REQUEST
City Attorney Slater Files Answer and
Affldavits and Further Action in
the Case is Delayed
Until Later


other property owners on Market
street west of West Main street to
restrain the city from collecting any
money or making any special assess
ments for the paving of that portion
of the street was in court for the first
time this morning when the attorneys
for the plaintiff and John C. Slater,
city attorney, appeared to argue the
case before Court Commissioner A. E.
Buckmaster. The city attorney filed
an answer to the summons to show
cause why the injunction should not
be granted in which he declares that
the city acted entirely in keeping with
the law provided for the Improvement
of streets in cities and that the work
on Market street was done at the
special request and instance of the
plaintiffs in the action. The answer
to the complaint is supported by four
afidavits made by Mayor M. j.
Scholey, City Attorney John c. Slater,
City Clerk George W. Harrington and
City Engineer R. H. Moth. After the
argument Attorney R. V. Baker who
represented the contesting property
owners stated that he would ask for
time to file counter affidavits and the
case was held open by the commits
sioner pending further investigation
into the facts in the case In the
meantime the summons and complaint
in the action served some time ago
will be sufficient to prevent the mayor
and city clerk from issuing the bonds
against the property Of the plaintlns
in the action.
The answer of the city covers many
pages of typewriter matter and IN il
the city attorney sets up twelve speci.
fc reasons why an injunction should
not be issued on the petition filed by
the property owners. The. answer
holds that the court commissioner has
no jurisdiction and declares that court
commissioner has no jurisdiction ia
hear or determine an issue in whick
the municipality is named as defendant
The, answer declares that the injunc.
ton if issued would usurp and impair
the legislative functions of the defen.
dant, The City Of Kenosha, that tbs
complaint of the property owners does
not allege that any damage was done
to any piece of property owned by the
plaintiffs, that no cause of action is
stated, that the property of the plain
tiffs has been greatly benefited and the
value of all property on the street
enhanced by the improvement Of the
street, that an injunction would be ar
irreparable damage to the city and to
the contractor, that the plaintiffs are
stopped from seeking an injunction by
their acquiescence and non-action, that
the improvements made were made al
the request of the property owners and
without objection, that all proceeding;
in making the Improvement Of the
street were substantially in compliance
with the laws Of the state, that tbs
plaintiffs nave adequate remedy al
law.
Following the citing of these twelve
reasons the attorney for the city de.
clares that the street railway company
did not circulate any petition asking
for the improvement OF the street and
that the company was not DESTROYS Of
having the street improved.
In the argument which, twas made al
brief as possible ON account of the
torrid weather the city attorney de-
clared that when the proper time ar.
rived he would be ready to cite
authorities to show that it was not
necessary for a majority of the prop,
erty owners to sign the petition fol-
an improvement to give the Council
the right to act.
The bonds to pay for the paving Of
the street were ordered issued by thu
Common Council at its meeting OF
Monday evening and some of the
property owners seem to think thai
the members of the Council acted il
legally in ordering the bond issue
This matter was brought before tbs
Council with the knowledge of the city
attorney and the resolution was passed
without objection, it being held that
none of the members of the Council
had been stopped in any way from
voting for the issue of the bonds anl
cash certificates.
It is probable that it will be som,
days before any formal action il
taken and it is certain that the facts
in the case will have to be threshet
out in the Circuit Court.