The Daily Missoulian. [volume] (Missoula, Mont.) 1904-1961, 1913-02-15

in the matter, and all acts since the
21st day of August, 1912, in connec-
ton with this Improvement district
No. 2, are void and of no force or eff
feet.
IF you follow the acts of the coun-
Gil in logical sequence you will see:
"First-That there was a meeting of
the council on Aug. Z, 1912, at which
time the resolution No. ia was
adopted and ordered printed in the
Ravalli Republican.
"Second-That the said resolution
was' printed in the Ravalli Republican
of Aug. 16, 1912, and the time to hear
objections set for Aug. 81, 1912.
"Third-That before or at this
meeting of Aug. 81, 1912, it was dis
covered that there was a misdescrip-
ton of some portion of the improve
ment district No. 2.
"Fourth-That at this meeting Of
Aug 81, 1912, the resolution was
again adopted and ordered printed in
the Ravalli Republican.
"Fifth-That it was printed a sec
ond time, appearing in the ape on
Aug. %, 1912.
"Sixth-That the time fixed in the
second resolution to hear objections
was Aug. %, 1912.
"Seventh-That there was a meet
ing of the council on Aug. %, 1912, as
above set forth, at which time there
was no quorum and the meeting ad-
%journed until the regular meeting of
Sept. 3, 1912, at which time a com
,,,;ttoz tro~ onpaintnl tn ascertain
whether there We're a sufficient num-
her of DIRECTORS to defeat the resolu-
ton after which the meeting adj
journed until Sept. 5, 1912, at which
meeting the committee reported. and
the resolution was adopted, finally.
MY conclusions are:
That in order to make the acts Of
the city council, since the 21st day Of
August, valid n binding, in rela-
ton to special Improvement district
No. 2, the minutes Of Aug. Fl, 1917
(f a meeting was held at that time>,
must be entered in the minute book
of the council.
IF there was no meeting on that
day, nor at any time before the reso-
luton was printed on the 23rd day of
August, at which meeting the resolu-
ton was again adopted as amended,
then the city council never acquired
jurisdiction to act further in this mat
ter.
Il further hold that if there was A
meeting of the city council on Aug.
81, 1912, or at any time before Aug.
%, 1912, when the resolution was
printed, at which meeting the facts
occurred as I have stated them, that
then, and in that event, the amend
ment to ordinance NO. 105, section i,
passed BY the council Feb. Z, 1913, is
valid and binding, for the following
reasons:
"Tha the exception in said amend
ment is as follows: Less any amount
which may be payable by any person
or corporation occupying any part of
said streets under franchise, Il eN-
elusive of sidewalks already con
structed in said district, in conformity
with existing ordinances, and eXclu-
sive of street allies and public places.
THAT the existing ordinance gov
erning the building of sidewalks in
the city of Hamilton, requires that all
sidewalks hereafter quilt be of con
crete, the same as the sidewalks in
Improvement district No. 2, will be
built, and any board sidewalk in inn
provement district No. 2, laid before
or after the passage of this above
mentioned ordinance can be emoVed
by the city, n the property owner
compelled to put dow a concrete
walk as provided by this ordinance
No. 1O5. Respectfully,
&C. NJ. PARIa.
"Hamilton, Mont, Feb. 10, 1872