The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1917-10-01
Street RAILWAYS
\ WRIT DISMISSED
JUDGE FREEMAN. IN DISTRICT
COURT. DENIES APPLICATION
IN PAVING CASE.
BACK TO COMMISSION
y Street Northwest Squabble Now Re
turns to City Commisslon.-Street
Railway Company Is Expected to
Make an Appeal.

Judge w. +. Freeman refused to
make permanent the temporary injunc.
tion secured by the Ardmore Street
Railway Company in the paving of c
street northwest. Attorney J. A.
Cotner, for the street railway, filed ex.
ceptions. This puts the matter under
the jurisdiction Of the city commission.
ers. where it rested previous to the
temporary restraining order recently
issued by Judge Freeman.
The title of the case, as docketed, is
George Erickson ct al, VS.. the City Of
Ardmore.
nel, and J. A. Bass, city attorney, agreed
upon a statement of facts, as to the
petition first filed and the subsequent
petition and kilograms attached. They
differed MS to whether the petitioners
on the first petition had the right to
''ange their mind and take their
b. from the petition. after signing
'oel to do that.
reed that a majority of the
citizen. right to designate the
kind Of rerial that should be used
the street railway should pave one foot
on each side of its tracks as the charter
provides. or two feet as later state
law requires.
City Attorney Bass said that the c'ty
does not care what material is used
In the paving. so long as it complies
with the law and suits a majority of
the citizens in the territory affected.
Attorney Cotner thought that the citi-
zens had right TO change their minds.
and especially as there was a difference
as to the width of the street to be
paved, and how much of the paving
the railway company must do.
1t was shown that n change In the
width of the paving was made after
the petition had been signed by some
OF the petitioners.
The first petition provides for Yer
tical vitrified brick and the second pc.
tition for ArdnOre Asphalt on eac,
side of the street railway track. and
creosoted wooden blocks for the center
of the tracks. The latter part would
Nost thc runway cOIiptHN more tnan
either brick or asphalt.
Judge Freeman said that he had lit.
tie regard for the attitude OF those who
had changed their minds in regard to
the character of the material to be used
or wanted to alter their views after go.
ing into the matter in good faith and
the arrangements agreed upon for paw.
ing by majority of the citizens in the
territory affected.
References to frand were not
brought into tn hearing. Attorney Cot.
ner for the railway company said that
he did not make such allegations
However. he asked for time to have |.
NJ. Putnam. manager of the street rail.
way to be heard in the case. This was
refused by Judge Freeman as he said
the case had been set for two weeks,
which gave the plaintiff ample time to
prepare for It.
Attorney Cotner t,.Jicated in his talk
that further litigation would result. and
stated that he could not see the harm
to anyone II the whole matter was stop
ped and new start made to give
Of the citizens of street a
chance to designate the kind of paving
they now desired used
The court indicated that this was not
a reasonable request