The weekly tribune and the Cape County herald. (Cape Girardeau, Mo.) 1914-1918, 1915-12-10
SUPREME COURT
UPHOLDS RANNEY
DRAINAGE ORDER
Denies Writ of Prohibition
Asked Against Judge
And County.
KNOCKS "EXCEEDING
AUTHORITY" CHARGES
No Opinion or Reasons Field By
High Tribunal-Oliver Gets
Telegram.

Judge R. G. Ranney's action in
cnjoining the Little River Drainage
District from cutting Cape County
highways in the construction of THEN
main diversion channel till the re-
sponSibility for the payment of $780,
900 for bridges is fixed, yesterday was
upheld by the Missouri Supreme
Court when writ Of prohibition asked
against the Judge and County was de-
MED.
The petition for the writ of prohibi-
tion was made by the attorneys for the
Little River Drainage District last
Friday, when r. b. Oliver, Jr., went
to Jefferson City to file the petition.
Mr.. Oliver yesterday morning re-
ceived telegram from the clerk of
the Supreme Court saying that the
writ had been denied. According to
the word that Mr.. Oliver received, the
courts decision in the matter was not
accompanied by any written opinion
nor were any reasons assigned by the
court for the refusal of the writ.
The county through special counsel,
Judge Edward d. Hays, on November
L, last, filed petition for an injunc-
ton against the drainage district re-
straining the latter from cutting the
county roads in digging the main di-
version channel, until the question of
paying for the bridges made necessary
by reason of the cuts was settled.
The drainage districts contention
is that under the state laws, the county
is supposed to pay for the bridges. 1t
is estimated that in Cape county the
cost will be about 100000. Eight
roads have to be cut by the diversion
channel and three of these bridges will
have to span a fioodway of about 1000
feet.
In the petition that Judge Hays pre-
sented to Judge Ranney, when he
asked for the injunction against the
drainage district, he argued that but
a small portion of Cape County will be
benefited by the drainage scheme of
which the diversion channel is an i'm
portant part. He argued that the
drainage district should have to pay
for the bridges made necessary
through the creation of the artificial
channel.
The Judge at that time issued q
temporary Injunction order restraining
the contractors from cutting any more
Of Cape County's roads until the suit
over the 100000 bridge money was
fought out. The injunction petition
was set for hearing in the February
term of court.
In setting forth the case, it was
styled, "The State Of Missouri at the
relation of ]. Henry Caruthers, Prose
cutting Attorney for Cape Girardeau
County" against the drainage concern.
In the petition for writ of prohi-
bition, the drainage districts attor-
neys argued that the party at interest
in fact was not the State of Missouri,
but rather the County instead and that
therefore a bond should have been put
up by the County before an injunction
was issued by the Court of Common
Please.
The reply to that contention was
that the county is separate arm of
the state and exercising government
al powers which make it part Of the
state and hence the bond was unneces-
sary. Accordingly it was argued the
Injunction was legal.
The other main point in the petition
for a writ of prohibition was that the
drainage district is under the exclusive
and original jurisdiction of the Butler
County Circuit Court in which it was
organized Accordingly, it was stated,
Judge Raneny had overstepped his le-
gal authority in granting the injunc-
ton asked against the district.
Judge Ranney last Saturday said
that jurisdiction of the Butler County
Court obtained only in cases where the
organization of the drainage district is
attacked and that any court has juris-
diction in case where claim is filed
against the district such as is the case
in the bridge money law suit.
Judge Ranney yesterday expressed