The Topeka state journal., 1909-03-11
THAT PAVING CLAIM.
Representative Robert Stone Explains
the Proposition.

In an interview this morning in re-
gard to the defeat of the bill in the
legislature to pay the Topeka paving
claim of 100000 against the state,
| Representative Robert Stone of Shaw
nee county gave out the following:
There is little wonder that Mr..
Fitzgerald feels it necessary to excuse
his studied opposition to the Topeka
paving claims. The claim is for money
actually spent by the city in paving
about the capitol square and the gov
ernor's mansion, and for interest on
the payments. The first of these i'm
provements was in 1887 and the last
was for repaving Tenth street last
fall. The amount of the principal was
$32,254.25 and the interest amounts to
over $4,000. Before the legislature
gated the claim in all it's details and
certified to its correctness. The at
torney general investigated the law
and gave an opinion that the claim
was just and lawful.
1.-THE laying of the pavement is a
matter of common knowledge.
1.-The cost of it is a matter of public
record If the property improved were
private property it would have been
sold for taxes long ago, as everyone
knows. The state cannot be sued but
the claim is an honest debt for the i'm
provement of the states property. The
attorney general says it should be paid
but Fitzgerald says that to pay it
would be 1ooting the state treasury If
the state should pay for paving at all
it should pay for all of it.
HE says I consulted my own judg-
ment and conscience
"Then his judgment and conscience
must have been about 5 per cent at
fault for he and his committee allowed
So, 200 of the $4,000 Elooting' to go unre-
buked and unhindered, not only under
their own eyes but over their own sig
natures. Not only this but they allow
ed in full the claim for paving in front
of state property in Kansas City, Par
sons, Olathe and other cities and at this
session and at previous sessions appro-
priated nearly 100000 to pave a road
from the penitentiary to Leavenworth.
So it would seem that Mr. F'itzgerald's
conscience works by spots as well as
percentages.
But our friend Fitzgerald intinates
in his interview that he rejected a
part of the Topeka claim because of it's
age. In other words he pleads the
statute of limitations. Not a very hon
orabIe thing to do but under some cir
cumstances it is justifiable. That stat
ute is based on the principle that a
creditor should be delinquent in prose-
cutting his claim before the debtor has
lost the evidence to dispprove it's cor
in this case the rule can not apply be-
cause the state can not be sued so the
city never could have enforced it's
claim. The proof of the debt is con-
elusive ana II II HdQ ever D0Sn pdlQ the
session laws and auditors accounts
would show it.
81 fear it is not conscience or tjudg-
ment' but jealous prejudice which is at
the bottom of Mr.. F.itzgerald's opposi-
ton to the Topeka claim.
I'm conference we offered to with
draw the claim entirely if the senate
and house would pass a joint resolu-
ton authorizing the city to sue the
state and have the claim duly adjudi-
Gated but the proposition was stolidly
refused as was every other proposition
for a reasonable settlement.
''The amount of $4,000 which was
finally allowed is a distinct recognition
of the justice of the whole claim and
two years from now the legislature
should be again called on to pay the
debt"