The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1916-11-28
EDCWOOD OFFICIALS
ARE HELD TO Be IN
CONTEMPT OF COURT
JUDGE ApDLEMAN holds MAYOR
AND COUNCIL HAVE VIOLATED
INJUNCTION.
Members of Council Fined SIS Eaca-
Sale OF Bonds Not Required

A1uvur =. NJ. Crjsw"ii and nemhcr3
of rh,. council uf thu Town ot Edgwoou
were hell! 10 h" IN contempt Oh cout. ~
"A decree handed down yesterday 49,
l:.un ny Judge l.. NJ. -llulSnian IN y -.
II of circui; court i'll III" case OIL 9tate
.nt Nest Virginia. EN- rel Atlantic hl> -
ulithir company ~. Town of EdEW"0'>
i al. .,, .b,
Nftrr handing duwu the deer" on the
uE;i hearing on Il rule Tor con y.
LudE. .lddleman IMPOSED uiUt! ~ ~.
t.ndantS L lin" ut So and COSTS "l ."r
issuance of the rule. adding. huWeE.,'
THAT the tine will b" rcmltted III me
event that tll> officials 81 EuE"uod S'l'Ne
from the town books. at the hcNt i'lcct-
inr. all resolutions pertaining t. utlEa-
,iMn h"tw,ru ;hc town and the Atlantic
Eithulithic company oyer CONTRAST
hrld by the latter for paving the m;LR
thnrnu shfart through the town.
The contempt proceeding was th' out
growth Of an ;Lttcmpt IN the par oi ''iS
present administration L EdEWo"d Il"
aupruyr contracts for paving with hti'h H.
by contractors other than the AlIah'lc
Rithuliihic company. Il road Tor "n''u
III. Atlantic Bithu!i;hir company h'tu
contracted with u former adininlSlFalt"tt
for hardSurtarinE. The contract Win
;h,. Atlantic HithUlithic company WnS
d.n.nrlrr, for it's completion upon the
s;tir- r"ud Improvement bonds 'SSu'u
by the town which are held h% present
officials oil f.Ue"h''I ~ Nv ''''' N''''
In making complaint for III" contempt
mi. TIN, Nlluutir 8thuiithic company
&, m pliiucd that thu spirit nl an lnJuHE-
ton order granted by JUG" -\HulrH''L''
70 restraining the Defendants from lh'cFi'F-
Ing with ihr performance" Of it's contract
viii, rh.. Town nt Ed4w0Uh was such as
t. r,.n,lir" tn. t"wu officials 10 take AL
ror,sSarv steps Ia sell IN" bonds here
f"!nr.. authorized h% vote "t III" cit
iX,uS of The town.
sal TO- arm
E.gartling this point. Judge Addi"-
man. in his deere" says:
Nothing is said IN said lnIunCti"'l
order concerning the sale OF the BONDS.
Tho question of the validity OF the
bonds seems not t. huv" h"cu bcfrr" the
Supreme Court If Appeals. and the
court evidently assumed that the sad
bonds were legally authorized ana
would h. sold by tn" said Town 4i
Edgwnod \ fair reading of tn" Courts
opinion WI Justify this CONCLUSION.
That being true. it can hardly be SAID
that the injunction order was INTENDED
To- amply TO the sale OF the bonds. II
seems to m" that ii our Supreme Court
had in mind tn" question or the seillnE
# bonds. the Injunction order would
hay. been so drawn us to leave no doubt
IS To what was intended. II would have
seated rs clearly what the said Town or
i:dcwo"d and it's officers should do with
Preferences IL the sale of the bonds. as
IL dll what Inv Stllb ''"ii anu is ~
Gers should do with refedcncc to inter
frrinE with tho plaintiffs contract.
1t is true that the sale nf the bonds.
and the contract, are closely Connected
bat am unable 10 find any satisfactory
reason which would Justify the holding
that the spirit of said injunction order
required the said town. through it's Of
ficers. TO sell the bonds in question.
Regarding the proposition that the
Town of EdGwond. through its officials,
violated the Injunction by interfering
with the plaintiffs contract, Judge AL
dlemauS deere" says:
Direct Violations.
1T apucarS from the evidence that
some time in June. 1916. the council OF
said Town passed an ordinance rcpudiat-
ing resolution passed IN OCTOBER; W.
relative to street Improvement bonds.
and again in July. 1916. said council
PASSED certain resolutions providing for
the Improvement of certain streets IN
said town. at least part Of which were
included in the contract with tho A.
iantic Rithulithic company. | am OF
the opinion that these acts were IN d.
rect violation Of the injunction order.
1T is true that during the hearing on
this rule council revoked Its action in
reference to the street improvement or
dinancc. but no action was taken with
reference to the last mentioned resolu-
tons. Those resolutions are still in
force and effect. and no effort has been
made by the mayor or the members or
council to repudiate or revoke said rcso-
buttons.
Hopes for settlement.
II fully appreciate the serious condi-
ton Of the litIgants In this case. and 1
hope that some fair and equitable way
might be found TO adjust the matters in
dispute. satisfactorily to all parties.
also feel that the action aiken by coun-
oil was done in good faith. and on ad-
vice of attorneys, and with no intention
on the part of council 70 openly defy an
order &c the Court. But my duty ia
plain. although unpleasant. | am there
fore Of the opinion that the said defen-
dants have boon guilty Of contempt Of
:he injunction order hcrctofore awarded
In this Court"