OCR Text |
Show THAT INJUNCTION. The Trnc Inwardness of the Action i;rourht By Mr. Carriarau Ag-ainst Treasurer Duke. THE OUT IN SALARIES THE CAUSE. Tho Law on the Subject Business Transacted Trans-acted in the Third District Court Today Interesting Notes. The report of the injunction obtained by Tudge Powers restraining Treasurer Duke from paying Chief Stanton's salary, which ippcared exclusively in last evening's Times, treated much discussion, aud there was a jrreat deal of guessing as to the real reason lor which the action was brought. The explanation of it. all is that the suit grows out of the recent action of the city council changing the salaries of appointed officers. Those whose salaries are cut, do not take kindly to the cut, and claim that the action of the council was illegal. Attention At-tention is called to section 12 of article 6 of the law relating to incorporated cities, i which is as follows: L "The mayor and couucilrneu of any city I shall receive such compensation as the city ) council may, by ordinance direct, but their ' compensation shall not be changed during their term of otnoe." Now the ordinance concerning salaries, which was passed on April 1st, lS'JO, and which was in effect when the officers now holding were appointed, was as follows: "Sectiou 1 That the salaries of the city officers and employees of Salt Lake City, be nd the same are hereby fixed as follows for the term of office for which each of them may have been elected or appointed: City Attorney $3000 AMiataal City Attorney 900 Supervisor of Streets 2M0 Superintendent of Sewers IMiH) Superintendent of Waterworks liSO I"o lice Justice a Watermaster 21; 0 Cui.'f of Fire Department 1800 Clerk of I'olice Court 'MO Fees as provided by ordinance. Now this ordinance being In effect at the time the appointments were made, it is claimed tiiat the law applied, and the salaries sala-ries could not therefore be changed during the term of office of three of the officials. The council, however, insisted that the ordinance affected only those whose terms of office had expired, and provided pro-vided on March 29th last to reduce the salary of the city attorney $500, the supervisor super-visor $400, the superintendent of sewers $400, the police justice $500, the water master 5'40O. On the other hand, the salaries of superintendent mf water works was increased in-creased $300, the chief of the tire department $"J0o, the clerk of the police court $300. The claim that the action of the council is illegal is based further in section 12 of article arti-cle 0 of the law applying to incorporated cities, which is as follows: "The mayor and couneilmen of any city shall receive such compensation as the city Bouncil may by ordinance direct, but this compensation shall not be changed during their term of office, and all other officers may receive a salary, foe or other compensation compen-sation to be fixed by ordinance and after the same has been once fixed, such fees or compensation shall not be Increased or diminished to take effect taring the term for which any such officer was elected or appointed." This makes the issue plain, and the action depends on whether or not the law6 cited, which were in effect when the officers were appointed, applied to them, or whether it simply applied to those who preceeded them. There is some misapprehension in the public" pub-lic" mi. id as to effect of the temporary injunction, in-junction, some thinking that it applies to all salaries of city employes and officers. This Is incorrect. The injunction is only agaiust the payment of Chief Stanton's salary. The Ilonds Were Put Asunder. This afternoon the divorce case of Annie Arnold vs. John W. Arnold came up for trial before Judge Zane. Mr. Butterworth appearing for the plaintiff and the defendant defend-ant was in default. Mrs. Arnold, a pretty young woman of about 23, took the stand and testified that she was married to Arnold on August 20, 1880. He never did anything any-thing towards supporting her, aud after allowing al-lowing relatives to provide for the wants of herself and children up to April of last year, he .- kipped out, and no one here knew where he was located. The plaintiff's tale of woe was corrobor atcd by her mother and a Mr. Ballard, and the decree of divorce was granted. Another Injunction Suit. A 6hort time ago James N. Marshall brought suit in Justice Gee's court against the National Bank of the Republic to compel the defendant to deliver to him nine deeds Df conveyance and three mortgages and certain cer-tain promissory notes, which appear ta have been left in escrow there. The defendant put in a demurrer, which was overruled, and the bank this morning tiled iu the Third district dis-trict court a petition for an injunction retraining re-training the justice from proceeding further fur-ther in the case. Court Notes. The demurrer in the case of F. D. Clift vs. C. W. A'eitch has been withdrawn aud ten aays allowed in which to answer. Tiie hearing on the motion to dissolve the ittaehment in the case of A. Goldberg vs. Joseph Simon has been set for June 11. The law library is being moved into the Dooly building today, and Clerk McMillan is niakinir preparations to move bis office. Iu the case of George A. Lowe vs. Francis Tate, Commissioner Greenman today gave judgment for the plaintiff for $59.45 and mats. In the case of Wm. Steinhart et al. vs. A. F. Sipperley et al., judgment was today tendered for the plaintiffs by consent for P125G.35. A. C. Nichols & Co. today brought suit tgainst W. L. Pickard to recover $5o4, al-4 al-4 leged to be due for wares and merchandise lolu the defendant. In the case of William Hardman rs. W. J. W. Harvey et al. , Judge Zane this morning fraated a decree of foreclosure. The property prop-erty involved is valued at about f 12,000. The Great Salt Lake fc Hot Springs Railway Rail-way company has brought suit against tVhite fe Sons to secure a rieht of way icross the defendants' land near the stock fards. Iu the case of H. Dinwoodey et ai. vs. Salt Lake county, in which the plaintiffs sue to recover damages for the illegal taking of travel from their land, the demurrer to the complaint was this morning argued and lubmitted. A. Y. Sipperly & Co. have brought suit igainst J. E. Morlan to recover $2050 dani-lires dani-lires alleged to have been sustained by them ihrouuh the failure of the defendant to have ;he store room in the Morlan building fitted ap for them at the time airreed upon. |