The Richmond palladium and sun-telegram. [volume] (Richmond, Ind.) 1907-1939, 1915-10-16
Judge Clark Declines Inter
pretation Because Of Tech
ndcal Flaw n Improvement
Law.
BOARD COULD ACT
Spirit Of Measure Believed to
Permit Installation - Citi-
zens Suspect Certain Off
cials Oppose Plan.

AC&ln6 upon the, a0vlce OF the bI1Ie
attorney general. James L. Clark, one
Of the msmbeYs Of the Indiana Public
Utilities conamission, has written to-
President Bayis OF the Richmond
beard Of public works that under .
strict interpretation Of the lis law
psrtatnin9 70 the installation OF orna-
mental lights such . lighting system
oould not be provided In Richmond
under the provisions of the act be-
cause Of technical obstacle ono Of
its sections contains.
ConseQueutly, Commissioner Clark
rules, the commission will not give an
opinion on tho authority Of the board
y OF public works TO order the installa.
j tiefl Of such . lighting system In Rich
mond. T.
Spirit Permits system. -
Commissioner Clark, however. says
that he personally believes the spirit
OF the law would not handicap the
board In acting favorably on the Pc
tition recently filed by business mon
on Main street. from Seventh to Tenth
streets, and on Eighth street. from
South "A to North A street.
Commissioner Clark suggests a
court Incorporation Of the law. His
letter follows:
"Ths receipt of your favor. Of Oct,
10 acknowledged and would have been
answered earlier but for the fact that
It presents very perplexing question.
The, strict letter of the law seems to
F.. prohibit the procedure In your case to
establish the ornamental lighting sys-
tenn under the act of 1916, for the
reason there Ia another utility operat-
Ing In the city furnishing electric
lights. The spirit of the law should
melN4esapt appgt ~ ~ y1ns0n ant
the. other. utility lis not furnishing
street lighting. and the muAicipslity.
hasse nlants which u furn3sAing street
mKntfffg TnfB shn4Kes'-6-Cx
Tor the courts to settle ana the com
mission as such does not care to give
an opinion upon 1t. The writer of this
letter personally Is of the opinion that
the city has power to proceed as IL
there was no other lighting company
In the city of Richmond" f., :,
! Asks for interpretation.
Today Fred Krone, one of the mem
bers of the public Improvement COM
mittee Of the Comnaercial club, in dis
cussing the question with President
Bavis. urged that the city bring action
In the Wayne circuit court for an
Interpretation of the vexatious section
OF the ornamental lighting law.
Mr.. Bavis did not commit himself,
however, on what action the city
might pursue. He merely remarked
that the circuit courts ruling would
not be final; that It probably would
be necessary to- have the supreme
court rule on the question. ~
Over seventy-five per cent of the
business men on Main street between
Seventh and Tenth streets. and on
Eighth street, between South A and
North A streets, have petitioned for
the installation of ornamental lights.
These petitioners feel that the board
would be perfectly safe in ordering
the system installed under the provis.
ions of the 1915 act without any court
proceedings. and that the city could.
without difficulty, collect assessments
from property owners who have re-
fused to petition for the improvement
They are of the opinion that certain
city officials are determined to de-
feat, If possible, the plan to prevent
the installation Of ornamental lighting
systems, and to accomplish their pur.
pose are unduly emphasizing the i'm.
portance of the Joker" contained in
the 1915 act They regard President
.Bavis and Superintendent Kleinknecht
of the municipal plant as favorable to
the proposed improvement.