Yerington times. [volume] (Yerington, Nev.) 1907-1932, 1910-10-22

ceive the most careful consideration of
the taxpayers of Lyon County at this
! time-and that is the subject of a new
court house and where it will be located.
The majority know considerable of the
subject-in way many are tired of it
but it is evident that the taxpayers do
not fully REALIZE what the present Sit
uation means and what it is costing.
In order to aid our readers to clear
understanding of the matter, we will
give brief history of the court house
| fight as it has come to us on good au-
thority and as we believe it to be- We
have no feeling i'll the matter except
such as any taxpayer or prospective tax
payer must have, and our only desire is
to aid i'll relieving situation that is be-
coming intolerable.
One and one-half years ago the court
house at Dayton was burned and it be-
came necessary to build new one
For years the center of population
had been at Yerington, the vast major
ity of the people of the county living
much closer to this place than to Day
ton. As provided by law petition ask
ing for an election on the question of
the removal of the county seat from
DAYTON to Yerington was circulated, the
required 80 per cent of the taxpaying
electors signed the same, and it was
presented to the county commissioners.
Now bear i'll mind, and don't lose
sight of the fact in considering this
whole affair that this and a subsequent
petition only asked that the people of
Lyon County be given an opportunity to
say where the majority wished to have
the court house rebuilt. The law gives
them this right
Commissioners Isaac Strosnider was in
favor of granting the petition and
then and at all times since he has fought
for the best interests of the taxpayers of
the whole county. But, on technicalties,
the petition was turned down, was car
ried to the courts and while the pc
titioners won the main points, under a
stipulation OF the attorneys, the petition
was left with a few less than the re-
quired number.
Soon after the commissioners adver-
tised for bids for reconstructing the
court house at Dayton. Five bids were
submitted and they were to be consid-
cred at meeting held Aug. To- 1909
A restraining order was issued by the
court, however, forbidding the commits
sioners from going ahead and three of
the bidders Withdrew their bids and the
ten per cent deposit which they had
made as all Evidence of good faith. On
Sept 9TH Contractor King withdrew
his bid and deposit also, and the next
day Shute, Lewis and Rammelkamp
withdrew their bid and deposit
This left no bids before the commits
sioners, all bidders having presented
written Withdrawals which are on file
with the county clerk
A second petition was then secured
which was signed by 20 per cent of the
taxpaying electors of the county--or 1C
per cent more than the required mum
ber When this was presented, action
on vote of commissioners Gates and
Martin
During this three weeks the opponents
of the petition thoroughly canvassed the
county and succeeded i'll getting mum
Der of the signers of the petition to ask
that their names be withdrawn. Thi.
petition with slightly under the 90 pei
cent required by law. But some of tn,
supporters of the petition alleged thai
some of these Withdrawals were secured
| by Misrepresentation and secured
another petition from them asking tha
their names be left on the origina
petition. The supporters also secure,
additional names for the origina
petition
All of these petitions and remon
strances were presented to the commits
sionerS at the meeting of Feb. 20, 1910
Strosnider asked that another reces
of ten daVs or two weeks be taken ant
a committee composed of members rep
resenting both sides of the controvers,
interview those petitioners who were il
disputc and ,lefermiue VVhetber ,,;ora,,
restation had been used and what thei
final decision was to be.
Commissioners Gates and Martin re
fused to do this They accepted til