The Caldwell tribune. [volume] (Caldwell, Idaho Territory [Idaho]) 1883-1928, 1910-11-11


Hedden On This Particular Sewer
System in Full.
The protestant taxpayers and prop
| erty owners in Sewer District No. 4
have begun legal action against the
City Council by appealing from the
Council to the District court. AS stat
ed previously in these columns Messrs
Smith & Scatterday and Rice, Thomp-
son & Buckner are the attorneys for
the taxpayers. At meeting of the
city council held Monday evening Oc-
tober 80, the council approved the as
sessments made against the property
in this district. At this meeting four
members Of the council voted to APP
prove. Councilman Harris had previ-
ously left the chambers and Council
man Clark refused to vote in the alb
sence of a full council.
Advertisements had been made that
protests would be heard at this meet
ing and in consequence there was pres
ent large audience of citizens of the
town. The protest as published in the
issue of The Tribune of October 28,
was presented by the attorneys.
Attor. ey Rice made a statement of
the case of the property owners and
asked permission to introduce wit
nesses. City Attorney Plowhead and
Associate Attorney, w. A. Stone, OBJ
jected to the introduction of witnesses
Considerable argument resulted be-
tween the attorneys. Councilman Har-
ris had some grocery bills to make out
and this date being the last of the
month, he turned affairs over to his
colleagues and retired from the sce"=,
After further discussion, Alderman
Farrar and City Engineer Richardson
, were placed upon the witness stand
Their evidence made no change in the
sentiment of either the property own
ers or the members of the council. 1t
was moved, seconded and carried that
4, the assessments against the property
be approved.
1t was the contention of the attor-
neys for the protestants that their eli
I ents had a right to go into the matter
Of the building of the sewer and its cos
and to show by competent evidence
that the whole assessment was unrea
sonably exorbtant, and it was their in
tention to have Engineer Richardson
and Engineer Hedden cross examined
and to prove by them that the cost o
the sewer should not have been NOR
J than $4,000 and should not have ex
ceeded $1,000
Attorneys for the city contende'
that the time OF protest had passe'
nd that the city council was simpl
o sitting as a board of equalization t
=, determine whether the assessment
we're just and equitably distribute
among the property owners OF tn
district according to benefits derived
llldl dS lllS plONNSAahtS hoN ~ . -
suit the proper place to determine tn
merits OF that suit was i'll the court
and not before the city council.
The city council evidently acted o
the advice OF it's counsel, and this yer
interesting case will no doubt b
y fought out in the courts.
The Tribune has interviewed severa
: property owners in the sewer distric
They say they expected the council
take the action that it did in the prem
P ises but think that Councilman Harri
Il treated them with scant courtes!
n They will now appeal from the counc
C to the district court where the entir
le matter will be investigated and FINAL
n settled. To prove their contention
Ir that the cost of the works was unref
n. sonable, the taxpayers employed Eng
rs neer E. E. Hedden to prepare an est
10 mate of the cost of the system as col
h. structed. This Mr. Hedden has don
tn and we submit his estimate in tot
The estimate follows: