Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 19, Number 1, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 7 September 1897 — IN DOUBT [ARTICLE]

IN DOUBT

Is the Second Ward Saloon Fight. The Status of the Remonstrance Against McCordLegal Points will Probably be Settled in Higher Court. Saturday’s Dally: The perennial struggle between the temperance people and the other side, over the question of a saloon in the second ward of Rensselaer is on again, harder than ever. Friday was the day for filing remonstrances against saloon applicants, under section nine of the Nicholson law and such a remonstrance was filed with the auditor against Will O. McCord, whp is an applicant for a license in the Roberts building, Strickfaden’s old stand, in the second ward. Only 81 legal names are required for a majority of the voters of the ward, as. shown at the last corporation election, and this remonstrance contains 92 names and the temperance people felt they had it sure. But the applicant had secured the written withdrawal of four of these names, before the remonstrance was filed, and three more of the 92 moved out of the ward. This would still leave 85 names on the remonstrance, or four more than enough to defeat the applicant. But four of these 85 signers live in Austin & Paxton’s addition, which was only recently annexed to the city, and as the limits of the second ward as described in the ordinance dividing the city into wards, do not specifically include this annexed territory, McCord’s attoriieys claim that the four in that,?' addition are not residents of the second ward. If this contention is held right it leaves 81 names, or just enough, on the remonstrance. But here again come the applicants attorneys who claim that at least one of those signers is not a legal resident of the ward. Thus if all the claims made by the applicant prove sound, there will be only a tie against the saloon, whereas the law requires a majority. But on the other hand the remonstrants claim that the general description of ward two, in the city ordinances, lets in Austin & Paxton’s addition. They also claim that the disputed signer is a legal resident all right. It is not unlikely that these disputed questions will lead to a legal fight which will have to be settled in the higher courts.