Pine Bluff daily graphic., 1916-02-22

response to the call for a mae+i1;e 2 to discuss the amount of the fee that the people would deem equitable for the collection of taxes due pavlns district No. 27, commonly called the cemetery paving district. Before ad- 3oufnment, a committee Of three had been nam q to present the meeting 2 views to Judge John M. Elliott chan, cellcr of this district, to the effect i that 90 cents should be the maximum allowed on each parcel Of land, and that the attorneys fees should be limited to a total of $250, any amount
 in excess of this sum to be turned Into the districts treasury.
 The meeting also adopted resolu- ton providing for permanent organ:- zation and authorizing the chairman to name committee of five to ln- ! vestisata all complaints of taxpay- CTS, concerning unreasonable ex- penses, charges or other matters con ] n2cted with improvement districts, and approved contenp plated action 70 1 enforce reduction of expenses of the bridge district.
 Gould Chosen Chairman. Organization was effected in short order by the selection of Judge James Gould as permanent chairman and w. H. Denver as permanent secretary. Called upon to explain the purpose Of the meeting, Judge Gould stata.i that suit to collect taxes due the cemetery paving district had been in sti suted, and that there had been en- tered q court order allowing Cole- man & Can't, attorneys for the dis trict, a fee of $2.50 on each parcel or let on which the tax is paid be- fof2 the final hearing of the case. Judge Could declared he had aseer. tained there are 1909 tracts men tianed in the petition, and that ihc total amount due in taxes. exclusive of penalty, fees and costs, amounted to $2,754. He called attention to the fac that if the attorneys are allowed $2.50 on each tract, the attornlays would collect a minimum of S3,272. Judge Gould asserted that Judge Elliott would protect the people ill the matter, and that all could rest assured on that point, as Judge Elliott had always been careful tc guard the peoples interests. The speaker also made it plain that his investigation had shown nothins derogatory to the commissioners of the district; that on the contrary everything inddicated they had been conscientious and true to the people in the discharge of their duty. The attorneys fees, however, he declared outrageous, and he severely criticized the attempt to collect such an tex orbitant fec"
 $500 Sufficient.
 Judge D.. J. Kerwin declared thas preparation of the petition in this case involved clerical work only, and that almost any attorney would be "tickled" to do the work for $500 He said that this was a matter in which the entire city is interesteu that the building of the street was through a matter of deep sentiment, and that it is to. be deplored advau tage should be sought of the public in such a transaction Judge Ker- win held that the city attorney should handle the legal part of the work of the district. He believed the meet ing should adopt a resolution asking the chancellor if he had been misin- formed, and requesting that the at- torneys' fees be limited to $500 and that those who pay the tax before final hearing be not compelled to- pay penalty and costs. He declared that he had called on Collector Hut, rendered the amount of the tax and had been given a receipt; that he had not paid fees, penalty or costs, and others had been treated in similar manner He wanted all the people to enjoy the same privilege.
 How District Formed.
 Incidents connected with the forma- tion of the district were related to by V. O.. Alexander, who commended the spirit displayed by all property owners at that time. He related that at the suggestion of Dr. Jordan, mayor at that time, he had approached Coleman & Can't with the request that the firm perform the legal work, preliminary to the formation of the district, without compensation. The attorneys, he said, agreed to do the preliminary work gratis, and no fee was paid them during the speakers connection with the project. MT. Alexander characterized the $2.5O as "exorhitant," and declared that the people should not tolerate such ac- tion. He offered a resolution, which reads:
 "Pine Bluff, Ark, Feb. 21, 1916.
 "The following resolution was pre- sented and read before a mass meet . ing of the citizens of Pine Bluff, Ar kansas, who are assembled for the purpose of protesting against the fee of $2.5O for each tract and parcel of land to be collected by the law firm 4os Coleman & Can't on a suit filed by them against the delinquent assess ments of the real property within paving district. No 27, city of Pine Bluff, Ark, being the cemetery pave ment
 That, Whereas, on the 18th day of February. 1916, suit was filed by the above named attorneys cover '. xlsa a,} t VI Hs s