The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1914-07-24
Hearing On Injunction tx Stop Laying of Warren
 ite Held Up
ccontinued From First Page-1

First it seemed to nlTn Inat tne word .spermanent', as it occurs In the 1 ing commission should be received in l it's ordinary rather than it's techni cal iscientffic sense. He also expressed 1 the view that it was evidently the in tention of the general. assembly to give l to the paving commission power to lay all pavement .selse 1t would not have given the commission the authority to designate kind and quality of pave ment.',
 This. statement by Judge Williams 1 were received by the plaintiffs as cast 1 ing a hopeful view upon their position. Among the interested listeners to the proceedings was City Attorney William H Comley. who ordinarily would act for the city in cases such as this but who is debarreda because he had given an opinion to- the mayor or Bridgeport that the contracts are il- legal
 Also among the interested spectators were Col. M. H. Rogers and H. H. De- Loss of the paving commission and for mer Assessor Larry Gill
 The plaintiff in the case. Clarence E. Anderson, occupied a. seat oposite his counsel, MT. Nicholson, and both con fronted an imposing array of five dis ting11ished- lawyers representing the other side of the controversy. Most of the morning was taken up by hearing more or less informal ar guments by various lawyers employed in the litigation, MT. Pullman taking the butt end of the battle to save the contracts.
 Judge Williams frequently joined in the discussion.
 MT, Nicholson made very brief which the injunction is sought He said that these grounds were as fol- lows:
 That Director of Public Works Cour- tade authorized certain Of the con- tracts on May IS, two days after the bond issue had been granted by the that time did not have any authority, even from the common council, to make such contracts.
 That there is no appropriation for macadan repairs and that it is out side of the power of the common coun- cur debt for such a purpose in the ab- sence of an appropriation.
 That the process of the $2Oo.OO0 bond 1 issue does not constitute an appro- priatfon for tl1ds purpose, because the contracts are made for 'macadaTn re- ceived from the sale of the bonds can only be used for the laying and con- struction of pavement 'sother than waterbound macadam.''
 Tn support of his contention that the ella borate repairs contemplated under the contract are not in the eyes of the law repairs at all but that they coastitute repaving of the street, he read from a large number of cases supporting his view.
 MT. Pullman, in discussing the case, said it would be better if the common council had specified in the contracts that the streets were to be paved with bituminous macadam, and then in his opinion there would have been no doubt as to. the legality of the con- tracts, basing this claim upon the contention of the defense that War ren1te is not permanent pavement in the technical and scientific use of the word permanent
 MT. Head. of counsel for the de- fense, addressed the court, reading from a written statement of some length and in an impassioned man ner. He was introduced by MT Pull man as member of the Boston, Mass, bar.
 It was not the belief of those pres ent at this mornings session that any conclusion would be reached today.