The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1915-10-08
JUDGE HERvEv TAKES APPL,cA
TON FOR INJUNCTION UNDER
ADJUSTMENT.
instruets Attorneys to File Briefs
Within Week-committee Attends
Hearing Yesterday.


] Arguments on the application for an
injunction. prohibiting the Triadel-
phia district board of educati SIS
closing the deal for the Clarke site
upon which to erect High school.
were submitted to Judge n. e. Her
vey In Part Two OF the Circuit court
yesterday afternoon. Attorney Joseph
, Handlan appeared for the tax payers
of Elm Grove. and Attorney J.
/ Handlan for the board of education.
J After each of the attorneys had pre-
scented his side of the case. Judge
Hervey directed that they. within
week. ile briefs covering their re-
spective arguments. and announced
p. that he would reserve his decision
until such time. as the briefs were
Z filed and examined. In this brief the
men are to give their citations and
authorities.
A cop;mittee OF citizens from Rim
| Grove ~ vicinity. composed OF John
! Thorn5urg. ID. NJ. Thornburg. J. c. Nc
Curdy. Rev l.. b. Lewellyn. Charles
Rice. G. w. Campbell. Henry Stein,
Harry Brennan. DIR. A F. Ruble, n.
II. Bodley. r. ID. Nickerson and
George d. Moore. was present in court
when ;he arguments were submitted.
Mr.. Joseph Handian opened the
case by perusing the application ior
injunction filed SOM time ago. In
this application he sets forth that the
voters had been led to believe that
, their wishes would be acceded TO;
that the board acted beyond its au-
thority: and that IL had no right 10
Ignore the will of the people. Further
more. that when the original deal was
/ ma 10 90 hn ~ xrhnra the
voters cast their votes for the Hign
school site. the law was such as would
permit them TO have last say.
In defense. Mr.. j. p. Handlan re-
ferred to numerous citations on what
constitutes the law governing school
boards. first in its original form. and
] then as amended in 1915. that by this
amendment in 1915 the final power is
vested in the school board. The board
objected. said the attorney. to every
part of the application filed.
Mr.. Handlan claimed that his clients
acted in strict accordance with the
law. and that James Beans in particu-
lar denied that he had ever made any
promises TO voters. or that he worked
at election to locate the school at any
particular place. All members denied
that they had withheld any informa-
I tion regarding the election. Mr.. Hand
Ian said that the Clark size had never
! been approved by the county super
intendent. hut the board considered
| Il TO be a desirable location, reason
able in price. situated on 4 plateau
where il could be drained, beautiful
surroundings. improved property and
that while IL is true there is a mauso-
leum on the adjoining property. the
rear OF the mausoleum will obstruct
the view from the cemetery which has
been considered obnoxious.
Many Sites Considered.
AS to the votes. Mr. Handlan said
out of 1882 votes cast. 1.l05 were for
the bond issue: SOS against .O52 for
the levy and 562 against. or a three
fifths majority. As to the preferential
election the total number of votes
cast was $40 and this was not consid-
cred necessary to consider. AS to
sites considered he said the board had
considered the Shelley property. 400
by $50 feet. at $1,000; Simpson prop
erty. FIVE acres. at $4,000: busch
property. 1870 by 300 feet. at $40. 900;
, Askew property. $50 by 270 feet on one
side OF the street, SIS 900. and opposite
/ 207 by $50 feet. at 1880. or a total OF
S22. $50; the Kraft property. five acres.
$4,000: and the Clarke property. sew
IN acres. So 900. AS to the county
/ poor house property he said IL had
never been seriously considered.
/ In closing Mr.. Joseph Hsndlan ar
firmed that the law had not been com
piled with in any way. and that the
board had done all in its power to
mislead the voters whenever opportun-