The Seward Polaris &
V1 iveithahm, Curator !
I'KRUITORIAL MUSEUM
No Vote Unless You Register Books Close Sat. Apr.3
BURTON BENNY
PASSES AWAY IN WN
Burton Benny, son of Mrs. Ed
ith Thoday. died at his home in
Electric City. Washington, last
Monday, March 8th, according to
word received here by friends.
He' was a musician in a mili
tary band and a veteran of World
War I. After his service he was
employed by the Alaska Railroad.
In 1921 Burton married Miss
Clair Ward who was a teacher in
the schools here at the time.
Many of her pupils are still resi
dents of Seward. Of this union
one son. Jack, was born.
Mr. and Mrs. Benny moved to
the Coulee Dam project in Wash
ington soon after its start and
have been there ever since.
Those who mourn his demise
are his wife. Claire, his son. Jack
and his mother, Mrs. Thoday who
is so beloved by all who knew
her. in both Seward and Moose
Pass where she formerly lived be
fore going to reside with her sis
ter. Mrs. Carl Strout of Seattle.
Washington.
m --
Hi-W av News
Courtesy of Mrs. Harold Maxwell
oil
Vic and Boo Witherup returned
to their home out here Wednes
day, bringing with them Bou'i
sister, Imogene and hjr husband.
Dick Steinberger. The Witherups
left here last December 12th.
They covered about 18.000 miles
altogether on the trip, visiting
Bichland Washington. Kansas City
Missouri, Moline, Illinois and Dal
las and Houston, Texas. On their
return trip, they were eight and
a half days coming from the Ca
nadian border. They found the
highway ‘‘good and bad", end en
dured considerable variations in
temperature within a few hours
—at Lower Post, for instance, the
temperature was 30 degrees be
low in the morning and, when
they reached Teslen at noon, the
temperature was 15 degrees a
bove. They hit a blizzard out of
Calgary, ana' had to wait for a
snow plow to clear the road.
They are very glad to be back.
“Too much confusion outside. The
people are kind of rude,” Vic
says. “We are glad to be back to
Alaskan hospitatity.” Boo repeat
ed Vic’s words, “It is really too
confusing outside.” Well, we are
very glacf to see them back.
The first thing Dick and Imo
gene are going to do is build a
house on Witherup's land.
I stopped by the Faulkner’s
this week, and found Linda deep
in catalogs, trying to decide on
just what kind' of draperies and
linoleum she wants. Mitchell, of
course, was working on the cars. 1
The Faulkners left Seattle for
Seward March 20, 1947. and right
away bought their place on the
highway, and have been busy
ever since improving and adding
on. They come from Georgia, al
though they were in Santa Clara,
California, a while before com
ing up here. They are the parents
of Wyche, Rene and Phillip.
Wvche served in *he war and. af
ter he had been up here a while
re-enlistcd in the army and* is
now outside.
Transcript of
Woodruff vs City
1#
In the District Court for the
Territory of Alaska; Third Di\ i
sion. James. 11. Woodruff, for.
himself and as a taxpayer of the
City of Seward. Alaska, and on ^
behalf of all the other taxpayers
of such City of Seward, Plaintiff. ■
vs. The City of Seward; a muni
cipal corporation; Clarence P.
Keating, as Mayor of the City of
Seward, Alaska .and William 11.
Noviek, Russell Painter, Barton
Stanton. Forrest Kennedy, and
Oscar Dahl, the members of hit
Common Council of ihe City of
Seward. Alaska, and Aaron Erick
son. City Treasurer, of the City
of Seward, lAaska, and Thomas
E. Howell, City Clerk of the City
of Seward. Alaska. Defendants.
No. A-4828. 'Councilman Sellers’
name was eliminated because he
was outside. >
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
On Friday, February 120, 1948.
the following proceedings v ore
had in the above entitled cause
in op^n court at Anchorage. Alas
ka:
COLfii. in (he case if Wood
ruff against the City of Seward,
proof was introduced in support
of the allegations of the com
plaint and also in support of the
defendants' answer, and the proof
was concluded' this morning by
a stipulation made by counsel lor
the respective parties to the ef
fect that the plaintiff, James Ii.
Woodruff, is a citizen of the Unit
ed States and of tin* Territory of
Alaska, and is now and a* all
times mentioned in this com
plaint has been a resident and in
habitant and taxpayer of the City
of Seward; that he is, ana' at all
times metioned herein, has been
the owner of property both real
and personal situated within the
City of Seward. Alaska, subject
to taxation by said City; and at
all time smentioned herein he has
been and is being taxed by said
City upon said* property.
The complaint challenges the
validity of an Ordinance known
as Ordinance No. 176 of the City
of Seward enacted by the com
mon council of the City and ap
proved by the Mayor, which au
thorizes, upon approval by popu
lar vote, two propositions:
The first is that the Citv of
Seward incur a general obligation
bond indebtedness of $90,000 for
the purpose of expanding and ex
tending the generating plant and
distribution system of the munic
ipally owned electrical utility and
issuing general obligation bonds
of the City in a sum not to ex
ceed $90,000.
The second proposition was that
the City of Seward issue general
obligation bonds of the City in
the sum of $81,360 for the purpose
of refunding outstanding revenue
bonds.
One attack upon the Ordinance
No. 176 is that it was not legally
passed in that attempt was made
to to suspend the rules, but that
the vote was not adaquate. only {
four members of the council hav
ing voted to suspend the rules, j
whereas it is said und'er the pro-;
vision of Ordinance No. 86 of the
Cty oif Seward, which prescribes
the method of doing business by
the city council, it was necessary
that five members of the council
vote in favor of suspending the
rules before the rules could be
suspended.
The plaintiff, in proof of his
contention that the rules were
not suspended by an adequate
vote or ao'equate number of mem
bers of the city council, put in
evidence a copy of Ordinance No.
17(i, which upon its face would
indicate that the plaintiff's con
tention was correct. However, the
defendant introduced in evidence
the original ordinance as signed
and a proven* and that ordinance,
upon its face, shows that the rules
were suspended by a vote of five
mem hers.
Now. it was inferentially sug
gested that some of the pages
of the ordinance book may have
been changed and, therefore. I
have mad t as careful inspection
as I could of the pages of the
book and they reveal no sign of
any such thing. It is possible, of
course, that other pages similarly
r’irted could be substituted, but
that would involve a fraud and
a forgery which I should hesitate
to believe was committed. And.
therefore I find that so far as
the procedure of the council was
concerned the ordinance was val
idly and legally enacted.
The other point raised by the
plaintiff’s complaint is that even
assuming that the ordinance is
valid, still under the law the City
of Seward has no right try this
procedure or by any other proced
uie that has been suggested, to
take up revenue bonds by the
issuance of general obligation
bonds.
I have carefully considered the
several statutes of Alaska con
cerning the issuance of bond's, in
cluding the Act of Congress which
authorized the issuance of the
revenue bonds which are here
in question and which are to be
substituted for or refunded by
general obligation bonds if the
ordinance is valid in that respect,
but there is nothing in that Act
which would auhorize any such
procedure. The only Act of Con
gress. or the only act of any leg
islative bouV. that could possibly
authorize the refunding nf n
nuc bonds by general obligation
bonds is the Act of January 17,
1940, an Act to provide for the re
funding of bonds of the munici
pal corporations and public utili
ty districts in Alaska. A careful
consideration of that Act convinc
es me that Congress never in
tended to authorize by this pro
cedure oulined in the Act the re
funding of revenue bonds by gen
eral obligation bonds. It is true
that such language forbidding the
issuance of general obligation
bonds for revenue bonds is not
embraced in the Act itself, hut
there is language in the Act
which shows that Congress had a
different intention.
We find in Sec. 1 the follow
ing. and I quote:
“Refunding bonds payable from
the revenues of a municipal or
public utility may be exchanged
"nothing wrong-we're just KEEPING ourselves
FROM RUSHING OUT TO 8UY EVERYTHING IN SIGHTl"
for a like orgrenter amount of
outstanding bond< payable from
the revenues of such municipal
or public utility,*" thus
indicating that the refunding
bonds of revenue .nature, payable
from revenues, must be exchang
ed for a like character bonds and
not for general obligation bonds.
The Act also provides that no
election shall he required to au
thorize the issuance of such ie
funding bonds.
Now. it is true that an election
was had in this instance, but it
was an extra legal election which
is totally unnecessary, and unless
there is found in the law some
thing to authorize such an elec
tion or authorize the issuance of
‘general obligation bonds for rev
enue bonds by such an election,
the holding of such an election
can not possibly validate the
bonds; ana' there is no such pro
vision of law that I have been
able? to discover and none has
been suggested to me hv coun
sel.
1 hen. at the end of Sec. 1 we
find this language, and 1 quote:
“That the total debt of the
municipal corporation or public
utility district shall not be in
creased by such refunding opera
tions.''
Now, I think it is plain beyond
argument, that if this proposal
is carried out the total debt of the
corporation will be increased, be
cause in refunding the revenue
bonds, at least, are not a debt
of the corporation or, if a debt
of the corporation, they are to be i
paid in a special manner and not J
from the revenues of the City. I
And so, the conclusion is that so
much of the ordinance as purports
to authorize proposition No. 2,
that is to say, the issuance of |
general obligation bonds in the1
sum of $81,360 for the purpose i
of refunolng outstanding revenue!
bonds in a similar amount. j
MR. BUTCHER: Your Honor. I
notice in the complaint Mr.
Peterson has prayed for costs and
attorney’s f^es. What is the dis
position of th(? Court in connection '
with that matter?
COURT: I think the City is pn-!
titled to the costs and attorney’s
fees,even though all the relief
asked for has not been granted.
The costs may be taxed as a
matter of course and the Court
will later fix attorney’s fees.
(Continued on page 2)
BULLETIN
Harry V. Hoben's condition re
mains much the same. For the
past week he has shown little if
any improvement.
•
TOWN CHATTER
•
Mrs. (Dr.) Ray Banister pur
chased a home in Spokane, Wash
ington. was the information re
ceived Imre by friends.
Word was also received of the
sudden passing of her mother re
cently.
©
Hal Gilfilen stated that reser
vations haa' been made for the re
turn by air of his wife and that,
she was due in Seward about
the 20th of this month.
fe
Mr. and Mrs. Leo Douglas re
turned Thursday from Anchorage.
c
Fred Henton was in from hia
lodges on the Kanai River.
Many of the Surplus barracks,
mess hall and other housing are
being moved in to the north of
the city on vacant lots. Owners
plan on rehabilitation and rentals.
Mrs. Fred Henton will leave
soon on a vacation to the States.
She will make a short side trip
to Kodiak after which she will
be in Yakima, Wash.
•
George Sunborg of the Alaska
Development Board was a guest
of Hotel New Seward Friday.
r
Mr. and Mrs. Leon Urbach re
turned from stateside on the De
nali.
Harry Smith, popular ex-city
clerk and' proprietor of the Rus
sian River Rendezvous came in
on the Denali.
•
Dan Bedford and family ar
rived back in Seward this week
via the Alaska Steamship Line.
Mrs. Phil Harding returned from
Cordova where she enjoyed a
short visit with her daughter,
Mrs. Richardson.
Mr. and Mrs. Virgil Heath ar
rived after a vacation trip to the
States. They got as far south as
Eugene. Oregon, and spent, some
time also at Coulee Dam and
Spokane, Washington.
• ---
Patronize those who Advertise