The Chickasha daily express. (Chickasha, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1899-current, 1913-05-26
Supreme Court Sustains Validity Of
Paving Statute Of0kIahOma in
Opinion Handed Down in
the Guthrie Case
UPHCLDS PENALTY And
INTEREST FEATURES
Court Declares that Law is Clear
and that the 7 Per Cent and
is Per Cent Provision
Must Stand

The supreme court Of Oklahoma re-
Gently handed down an opinion IN the
Guthrie paving case, holding adverse.
ly to the plaintiffs on all points con
sidered necessary to a decision OF the
case The style OF the case was j.
F. Schultz vs. Fred w. Ritterbusch,
county treasurer, ct al The plaintiff
sought 10 eni0in the treasurer from
selling property for delinquent paving
tax and IN ihe case the constitution
ality Of the paving law and a number
OF other important points were raised
The decision Of Judge Huston OF
the district court Of Logan county
rendered last September. was to the
effect that the provisions Of the Okla
homa paving law requiring payment
Of per cent interest on deferred in-
stallments of paving assessments an
u due and payment of is per cent
interest on the assessments after they
became delinquent. were invalid The
supreme court reyerses Judge Huston
on these points, and holds that the
paving act is constitutional aud that
the per cent and is per cent proyis.
ions ot the act are valid and enforce
able
The following are important feat.
ures Of the decision:
The aixty day period Of limitation
under section 72s Comp laws OF 1909
within which an action may be
brought to set aside special assess
ment. bars the property owner in an
action to enioin collection Of the as
sessments as to all defects in the pro-
ceedings which are not jurisdie-
tional
Charges for engineers services may
properly be included In an assess
ment on abuttlng property as a part
OF the cost Of the Improvement and
objections thereto do not run to the
jurisdiction of council to make the
Improvement
Sections 72G and TT. Comp laws Of
1903 are held to be constitutional and
authorize the collection Of Z per an
mum upon assessments prior to ma
turiiy and Il moi paid when due, is
per cent per annum thereafter until
paid
The court says in part TN pass
ing upon this act which is assaiIed as
unconstitutional. It is unnecessary for
Ms to inquire into the wisdom there
of, or to state why the legislature re-
auired the bonds to bear per cent
per annum from their date until ma
turity and 10 per cent from maturity
until paid. or why the assessments to
meet the bonds were required to bear
interest at the rate OF T per cent per
annum. and II not paid at maturity to
bear IS per cent until paid, It is suf-
ficlent to say that the provision is
clear and mambiguous and means
what il says We can see nothing in
conflict with the constitution in the
provision in effect, that the assess
ments bear one per cent greater in
terest than the bonds before due, .ant
8 per cent greater thereafter
1T may be that the difference o.
one pcr cent between the bonds ant
assessments before due was intended
to cover the cost Of printing the bonds
and Of collection and remittance b.
the city which, as to the amount col
lected on the assessments, stands Il
the nature Of a stakeholder AMI
which would otherwise have to be pai'
ont Of the general funds Of the city
And II may be. that in addition Il
these costs, said per cent was in
tended to contribute to the expens
incurred where, as here aftey the as
easements became due the propert
owner resiste payment by suit Blu
be that as It may, we are of opil
ion that said items of increased inte
est are In the nature of 4 penalty II
tended to meet conditions brougf
about in part BY the property owns