The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-10-21
WILL BUILD DIKES.
Board Commissioners Make the
Order.
To Protect South Side for a Dis
lance Of Two Miles.
COST TO. BE S117,4sO.
Most of Objections Came From
Small Property Owners.
Case Where Two Feet of Water
i'm House Did No Damage.

The South side Kaw river dixie was
ordered to be built by the Shawnee
commissioners in special session
Wednesday evening after completion
of the examination of the report of the
viewers. The special session came as
the last opportunity for action for yes
terday was the tenth day since the re-
port was filed and the last allowed by
law for action by the board of com
sioners.
In accepting the viewers report and
ordering the dixie built which will cost
Sill. 430.60, the county commissioners are
considering the larger interests of the
city which will have to pay the bulk OF
| the cost. The only objections to the
proposition comes from small property
owners who would rather have water
| On their property than pay a small tax.
| AS Mike Herr said when asked wheth
er the big flood of 1903 had reached
| him, Yes, it came UP on the floor
How deep?"
About two feet
And there was damage in having
| two feet of water in your house?'
mot at all.'
Still there are a good number of these
small owners who have 80 days time
allotted them in which to file an appeal
| from the order of the commissioners
| and try it out in the district court.
| Anu there Is d pOSSlD1IlLY llaC SuCH
| privilege will be taken advantage Of
| 1t will be the endeavor of the board
| to get the construction begun as soon
as possible in order to have the dixie
completed before the 1910 spring flood,
| should there come one and careful
| specifications will be compiled by the
engineer from the viewers report, in
which he assisted, to be submitted for
| bids to constructors.
Since the handing in of the report, the
commissioners have spoken favorably
cent of the property owners in the dis
| trict want the protection" said Com
| missioner Ed O'Neil, land there was no
| doubt with any of US that the dixie
| would be a good thing The large in
| terests along the river. the men who
| own thousands of dollars worth of
| property and pay hundreds and thou
| sands of dollars every year in taxes
| are most strongly favoring the dixie
| proposition and they are the ones who
| will practically pay for it,
In fact, as such a. large per cent OF
the property owners had petitioned for
the dixie and the board of viewers made
| their report all in conformity with the
| law, there was nothing else for the
commissioners to do than to order tie
| dixie built - = d. =. s-s
| Before the commissioners passed upon
| the question, however. County Attorney
| Schenck wss asked to supply his opinion
| upon the lcSdjIly OIL INC proposition anu
found nothing in it which could be con-
| strued as an unlawful form or any as
sessment which could be declared I'M
| lawful.
| That 1t would be extremely difficult to
| find anything unlawful in the assess
ments was fully explained by Edwin
| A. Austin in an interview with the
State Journal reporter several days ago.
That assessment is based upon the ben
| eft to be derived and the benefit is
figured by computing the damage like
| ly to result from a flood
AS an entire proposition the property
is valued at 81 ,947,5O6. and the cost of
the protection $117,430, or the benefit on
the whole district figures close to 3
per cent. The most particular diff
Guilty in the proposition which disturbs
the small owners of property is that
the level of the top of the dixie and
consequently the drainage boundry was
fixed at one foot higher than the 1903
flood and the people are refusing to. be
| lieve that water will ever run so high
again. But as protection for the
years to come, the viewers are confident
that they have done the right thing.
| To show an unlawful taxation in re-
gard to the dixie cost it would be nee