The Glasgow courier. [volume] (Glasgow, Mont.) 1913-current, 1920-07-23
DENY ROCK CREEK
COUNTY PETITION
Board Holds That Petitions Not
Being Verified Leaves Them
Without Jurisdiction.
SACO PEOPLE ARE OPPOSED
Withdrawals From Original Petitions
Cuts Territory Below Required
Number of Square Miles to
Create New County.

Yesterday and last evening were
consumed by the board of county COM
missioners in hearing the arguments
for and against the granting of the
petitions praying for an election to
create the proposed county of Rock
Creek Dignan & Shea of this city
and o. w. Mcconnell of Helena, rep
resented the petitioners for the new
county, while Norris, Hurd, Rhoades
& Hallet represented the opponents of
the new county.
A large delegation of citizens from
both Hinsdale and Saco were present
at the hearing, the Hinsdale people
being interested in the granting of the
petitions while the Sacoites were op-
posed to it.
The petitioners presented the affi-
davits of publication of notice of hear
ing and bond for $4,000, which was
approved and filed by the board.
The opponents objected to proceed
ing and asked that the proceedings
be dismissed on the ground that the
notice as published was defective, and
was no notice at all, and therefore
the board was without jurisdiction to
proceed. The board held that the no.
tice was sufficient and ordered thew
should proceed with the hearing.
They then took up the petitions for
the exclusion Of territory from the
proposed new county which had been
filed by the opponents of the county,
being five in number, and considered
them in their consecutive order, all
of which were granted. The propon-
ents of the new county offered with
draWals of names for the exclusion of
leiiite~y EDITIONS but the board re-
fused to consider tft s.....G on the
ground that they had not been filed
at least one day before the hearing
commenced
At the conclusion of the hearing and
after all the evidence had been offer
ed by both sides, the opponents of the
proposed new county moved that the
petitions be denied, on the ground
that no verified petition was ever
presented to the clerk of this county
of the board; second, that the board
OF county commissioners by reason of
the insufficiency of the petition, it
not being verified according to law.
never acquired jurisdiction to hear
the petition; third, that by the admis-
sion of one Of the verifiers of the ne
ton he had no knowledge upon which
to base any belief, besides eighteen
signers on the~petition, and therefore
was incompetent to verify the peti
ton, he having admitted on the wit
ness stand that he had no informa
tion upon which to base his belief.
the verification of the petition fails
to bring it within the purview Of the
law, and no evidence has been offer
ed in support of the verification of
the petition; fourth, that there never
was given any proper or legal notice
as required by statute in this case, in
that no valid notice was ever publish
ed in the territory which would re-
main in Valley county after Rock
Creek county was created, and there
fore the board never acquired jurisdic-
ton therein; Fifth, that the withdraw
al of territory from the proposed new
county Of Rock Creek, which petitions
have been granted by the board, have
reduced the area of said proposed
county to less than one thousand
square miles, and have therefore di-
vested the board from taking any fur
ther action in this case than to dismiss
the petition herein. Sixth, that the
allegation sci forth in the petition
with reference 10 valuation was insult
ficient and were at all times insuffi-
cient to give tho board jurisdiction to
hear this petition.
On motion, the petition for the ere
alton Of Rock Creek county was denied
by the board,