Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1850-1854, 1852-03-26
Kenosha, March, 1852.
For the Telegraph.
Mr.. CLEMENT

For the Telegraph.
Mr. CLEMENT:
was not little surprised TO hear that an ar.
,icle had appeared in the Democrat Of last week
denying some Of the statements there made. and
misrepresenting others, by the generally candid
G. G. Sheles. II seems he must have have gone
off half-cocked, or he would not have written an
article so unworthy Of himself am disposed
| to give him credit on this score, for | know he
would not have replied TO il in SO ungenerous
manner, IL he had taken time for reflection. But
70 proceed to the facts--,he City Charter says:
SEC. %. No member of the city council shall
be party to or interested in any contract or job
with the city, and any contract in Which any
member Of the city council may be so interested
notwithstanding this prohibition shall be null and
void and of no force against said city as party
thereto.
He says, (and he ought to know mo alder
city" Who built the bri3ge across Church st?
| do not say that any body else would have built
the bridge at less expense to the city than Al
derman Fish did. don't believe any body else
would. | would like TO know how, by the char
ter an Alderman could have built il at all.
But Mr.. s. says the charter "says in imme-
date connection" "except as herein provided
for; )" this immediate connection" is five sec
lions beyond, in Sec. %, when, in speaking of
paying for services rendered the city, it cuts off
all hope for paying the council in the terms fol-
lowing, 10 wit
"Provided, that the said city council shall not
have power TO vote any pay or compensation for
the members thereof, or for the mayor, excepta as
herein provided fer"
! Provided for, wherein In the charter, Of
course; and by careful reading Of the charter |
cannot find whsrein the provision for paying
members nf the Council is found, and will chal
lenge anybody else TO. l ain not speaking Of
the proprety of their having pay for their work.
l am speaking Of the authority from the charter
But he says an Ordinance was passed by which
they rould &c. their pay, Well, why have any
charter? Why no, have all Ordinances, if Or
dinances can set aside charters +? lie thinks
"there is but little ground for questioning the le-
gaiity Of that Ordinance" | think there is
great deal of ground. A mere matter Of differ
ence OF opinion between Mr.. s. and me, Mr..
Editor, that is all.
He insinuates that stated in my FORMER COM
muuicalon "tha, all services OF this kind (mean-
ing specially were uncalled for" and then takes
upon himself the extra labor of branding it ian
assertion as dishonorable and uncelled for as it is
statements lies, or what is the same thing, says
they care not tue" OF course, he will be able
to bear with me when reciprocnte the compli-
nent and tell him never said anything like what
be has charged upon me. He admits that with
those extracts from the Charter, staring them in
the face, the aldermen have received for spe-
cifc services this year Sl75. What is the differ
ence between services-what makes one enti-
lied 70 the christian name of ".peci6c 2" are 9th.
er services too poor or Of too little use TO be
paid
am not contending agains their being pnyed
Tor believe oil services for the public should be
payed for as we'll Us those rendered for the bene
fit of indivduals-so that his extra pe,tifoggng
IN the ground Of reasonablenrss and decenry,
amounts to nothing with me, for can sec through
it.
In conclusion. all have to say is that there
has been allowed for some service or other, or for
something or other, either in contracts or with
on, contracts, to the two boards Of aldermen
who have acted during the two years the city
charter has been in operation, the sum of 1871
81.
And the city charter still retains Sec. %, and
the place in the charter cannot be found where
they can receive pay "as herein provided for"
Yours, NORTH WARD.