Show I 1 i I 1 1 pHOT ESTORS ARE I 1 judge miner sustains the defendants demurrer lythe PAVING injunction CASE so grounds fop for the complaint Comilla tnt the plaintiffs given three days to amend briefs were filed yesterday ty in tha io in suit against the lity gity by jode judge sanction ati 0 n babeon 11 0 S fr or the plaintiff and J JN N kinball 8 for the cita asking that the council be ili perpetually enjoined and re et rained rim levying asaei inta upon ral real estate estat a gi luiting upon twenty fifth district no na 2 for the street it of havink the thoroughfare with utah blocks or in fact material this wai in accordance any SDI with an agreement made between y the attorney attorneys a some day days a ago baige miner had via stated ed upon ahl filing of c the aalt ait that at taa tho pleasure of the interested tere te eted FArt parties les h he e would devote two to alls its bat but tha the several evenings evasio ey asio dec dee ded to submit their aidea on briefs without argument the fadze devoted the entire day to the au thili ica jes cited or berj a last evening sustained defendants demurrer and gave the pitin iffa three days time in finch to amend their complaint after buiting ilig in a noet most concise manner I 1 the pounds grounds taken by the pla plaintiff dpn I 1 I 1 which tte euit suit bad been instituted the defendant contends con tenda that the complaint 1 does not 8 state late facts sufficient to conati I 1 I 1 ehte a cause 0 I 1 action farat Beci because lase it does not appear that there waa was any pro tbt by the property owners la in the district against the making of the improvement atrit although the notice of of intention in the case at ba bar r was wag published for or the fall period of time required by the statutes eta the ob fictions being the levying of adv local assessment upon the property of the 0 objectors actors second the de demurral murrAr shout abe be sustained because plaintiffs have an as adequate and speedy remedy at at in rase case the levying of the tax for fr the improvement ba be proved illegal ill ezal quoting from tha the compiled laws of 1890 mr air kimball says no auch anch special tax shill be declared i void nor shall any such or pat pat t there it ba be set aside in in consequence ot of any error or y permitted or appearing pearine ap in bli any of t the p under sald act or of the acts of which it ia its amendatory bat aaa parly party feeling ee lini by any such bach special tax asses or orlevie to viel upon hn hie her 0 its property or ench such install meata meats t as may ba be du dai at any time before the same shall become da Ita quent andor protest and with notice la 12 writing to the city cA collector lector that ho be donds to sue to recover lh alias same bica notice particularly the alleged gri evanca and d fh A goun gounds g ds thereof whereupon I 1 tuch such party shall have the right to bring brin a clil civil action within sixty days thereat er and not later to rev remover overs ai much of the special tax paid as he shall show to e illegal tio equitable and the i coe caes to follow toe judgment to be ap I 1 cottoned por pot toned by the court aa as may bem shall be proper which remedy ejiu I 1 ive had red tha the proposed tax been levied at the time of bringing tha the action b I 1 and the collector was prace adin g to enforce ita its collection the plaintiff i could not hava have enjoined enjo inert the collection coLe cion of the tax because the statute nivea them another reme remedy dy and makes and when there irany ia any remedy at law an injunction will not ba be granted third for the reason that no injunction lies to restrain a c city ity council in to proceeding with its legislation when the matter to ba be legislated upon ia Is within the tle scope of ita its authority the city council of ogden city ii authorized and empowered to divide tho the city into di tracts for sewerage paving and other purposes and to defray or chuse to be defrayed the cost and expanse I 1 of euch such improvements or any of them and has the ote power and authority to levy and collect special taxes and as at sess ments upon the abutting property and has the right and power to pave or ae such material and in such manner aa as it my may deem proper and necessary fourth it is claimed that the tho tax if would be illegal and this appears upon the lace face of the proceeding eding tolt the insufficiency of the I 1 notice ol 01 intention and bachuss cl c the protest and thia this action seeks to strain res traia the levying of the tax beS a it would create ft A cloud upon the title of plaintiffs Plain tiffi courts of equity never inter 1 ato to restrain the collection of a tax filere the iii validity invalidity appears upon the face ot of the proceedings but only in those casa where evidence outside the metod I 1 Is 1 nece necessary esary to chow show the invalidity a are cited in the brief judge miner thoroughly investigated in the care and examined all au an cited by both eldes sides and aa as before mentioned decided to la favor of ibe the defendant toia tois virtually dismisses the calm and stud leave the city at liberty to commence the work of paving unless in 10 the amended complaint nt which must w be filed within the next three daya days booe boo e new point ia is sprung and that teems hardly probable |