The Chickasha daily express. (Chickasha, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1899-current, 1912-10-02
Judge johnson hseds Petition
Of Paving Tax Payers ind Is
sues Temporary Restraining
Order Against Defendants
DATE FOR THE FINAL
HEARING NOT SET
Court Forbids Collection Of Spe-
cial Tax and Penalties and
Sale of Property Till Final
Adjudication

BY the terms Of temporary re-
order, issued by Judge John
son Of Lawton, following a hearing in
the district occrt here, last night, city
officials ana all other defendants in
the paving tax suit are enioined from
collecting any Assessments Or penal
ties and selling Or attempting to sell
any property on which paving assess
ments are levied in Improvement dis
trict No. 3 Of the city of Chiekasha.
The decree is to remain in effect till
a further order is issued BY the court.
No date was set for the final hearing
which will determine the merits Of the
case as several Of the defendants were
not represented in the hearing for a
temporary order. In addition to city
officials and the city Of Chickasha,
other defendants are G. A. Heman, the
paving contractor, and the bond pur-
chasers.
The district court room was well
filled with interested citizens when
the hearing began Attorney Alger
Melton made the principal argument
for the plaintiffs, going over the NUM-
erous points raised In the petition and
stating the contentious OF the taxpay-
ers City Attorney Hammerly, who
appeared for the city officials alone,
contented himself with a brief expose
tion Of the law as he interpreted it,
stating that the city officials were
merely complying with the statutes.
AS to issue Of fraud raised in the
case, he said he did not care to make
any answer as that concerned other
defendants In the case. Judge Stuart
closed the argument for the plaintiffs.
summing up the grounds on which a
temporary order was asked.
Mr.. Melton discussed the contentious
Of the plaintiffs at length, occupying
about two hours in explaining the is
sues and presenting authorities bear.
ing on the legal points His first con
tention was that the ordinance declar.
ing the necessity for creating the paw.
ing district was void because it failed
to provide a definite time for going
into effect the people thereby being
deprived Of the right Of referendum.
The next contention was that the paw.
ing bonds were accepted BY the con-
! tractor at s. cents on the dollar in
stead Of at lace value as required BY
! law The contractor, he said. made his
bid with the understanding that the
bonds would be taken at S5 cents.
The third point which was stressed
by Mr. Melton was that the property
in the paving district was not actually
viewed BY the appraisers as required
i by law, but that the latter merely ac
= cepted the figures Of the city engineer
4 Mr. Melton next took Up the addi
:. tional one per cent interest and the Il
: per cent penalty. arguing that the stat
\ utes under which these were collected
E were unconstitutional. The "a pc
i cent that was collected for engineering
i fees was likewise declared illegal
Considerable time was devoted b
y Mr Melton to the next contention q
of which he held that the assessments I
Il a large number Of instances were vol
n because they were out Of alt propol
u ton to the value Of the property.
,n some instances exceeding such valul
~ and they therefore amounted to col
as fiscatlon Of property Or spoliation
i The last contentious alleged fraud
IA the carrying out Of the contract an
# the contract was declared void on th
n account It was alleged that one
an the paving inspectors accepted ps
ro- from both tie city and the contracte
AZ being In eollusion with the contract
in the fraud It was further deciarl
. i that the contractor did not use 4
proportion of cement In the concre
= required by the contract but dellbl
= ately fixed the mixing machine att
3 It had been set 30 that q smaller ~
> porti0n Of cement would De used.
; these grounds 1t was eontendea @
} , the contract should be- set aside.