Brewster v. The City of Davenport

• Decision Date: 13 June 1879
• Citation: 1 N.W. 737,51 Iowa 427
• Parties: BREWSTER v. THE CITY OF DAVENPORT ET AL
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

1 N.W. 737

51 Iowa 427

BREWSTER v. THE CITY OF DAVENPORT ET AL

Supreme Court of Iowa, Des Moines

June 13, 1879

Appeal from Scott District Court.

PLAINTIFF presented his petition to the judge of the District Court praying for a temporary injunction to restrain the city of Davenport from selling certain lots or land situated in the city upon an assessment made thereon for the purpose of constructing a sidewalk upon the street adjacent thereto. The injunction was refused, and from this action of the judge plaintiff appeals.

AFFIRMED.

Cook & Richman, for appellant.

H. M Martin, for appellee.

OPINION

BECK, CH. J.

I. Plaintiff insists that, as shown by the petition, the city had no authority to order the construction of the sidewalk for which the assessment sought to be enforced was made. The statute and ordinance of the city (Code, § 466; City Ordinance 51, § 2) provide that improvements of this kind, when not asked by a majority of the resident owners of property abutting upon the street, "shall not be made until three-fourths of all the members of the city council shall, by vote, assent to the making of the same."

Plaintiff insists that the city council could not assent to the work for the reason that the councilmen did not have sufficient knowledge to act intelligently upon the subject. A committee was appointed to examine and report thereon; one only of the committee reported. We know of no reason why we may not presume that the council, individually and collectively, were fully informed of the facts connected with the work, and prepared to determine that it was required by the public wants. Indeed it appears to us that members of the city council, like all members of legislative bodies, may acquire knowledge of public affairs upon which they act from any and all sources--from observation, from public rumor, and from the opinion and advice of others. The committee was intended to gain information for the council. If the report of one member of the committee gave the council information which they believed demanded action, or if they had, of their own knowledge, such information, it is sufficient. The law bestowed upon them the authority to determine whether the improvement should be made. The law will presume they had sufficient intelligence and information to exercise this authority.

II. It is next urged that as the petition alleges that the journal of the proceedings of the city council fails to show that the resolution directing the construction of the walk was made by three-fourths of the members of the council, the improvement must be regarded as not having been legally ordered. The record shows that the order for the improvement and the assessment was adopted by the council. The statute and ordinance declare that the adoption of such order and resolution must be had upon the vote of three-fourths of...