Show THE CITY ANSWERS The City Makes Reply to J H Griffins Grif-fins Complaint An answer and demurrer was yesterday yester-day filed by the city attorney in the case of J H Griffin vs Salt Lake Cay in wMch Griffin prayed for an injunction Injun-ction to pre nt the city council from letting the contract for extra sprinkling to anyone besides himself The answer denies that It was the intent of either party to the cntract to award the plaintiff the work of I sprinkling such other streets as the city council might determine should bet be-t sprinkled during any part of the life of thecontract and allejes that by the contract the defendant reserved to itself the sole and exclusive rIght to determine to whom and at what nrlce it should let a contract for any extra sprinkling it might require It is then specifically denied that under the contract con-tract the plaintiff was entitled to perform per-form any extra sprinkling at the rate of 245 per week per block or another > an-other sum It is also denied that the following clause was inserted thecontract bj inadvertance or by mistake UIt is further mutually agreed by the parties hereto that if at any time dur ing the life of this agreement said first party shall request it said second party shall sprinkle any other streets within the limits of said city and not embraced within the sprinkling district dis-trict aforesaid at the stipulated price of 245 per week per block and it is denied that the following was what was intended to be inserted hIt is further mutually agreed bj and between the parties thereto that If at any time during the life of this agreement the first party shall determine deter-mine to have sprinkled any other streets within the hmts of said chard ch-ard not embraced within the sprinkling districts aforesaid the said second party shall do such extra sprinkling at the stipulated price of 245 per block All the material allegations of the complaint are denied and In short It is set up that any negotiations which were entered into by the parties prior to the making of the contract were merged in the contract and that In junction Is not the proper remedy as the plaintiff If he has a grievance has his remedy by an action at law In the demurrer it is set up that the I court has no jurisdictionf there is a defect of the parties in that the city A i council and mayor are not made par Y ties to the action and that the complaint com-plaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action |