Weekly American. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1858-1858, 1858-01-16
LOCAL INTELLIGENCE.
CITY COUNCILS.


nounced that he had signed the bill to organ.
ize police system for the city of Washington
He also announced that there was standing
to the credit of the Corporation, the sum Of
$4,000
A bill was passed making an appropriation
for compensation Of Board of Assessors
Mr.. Houston introduced bill to pay in
terest, and $4,000 of bonds, (matured) guaran-
teed to Washington and Alexandria Rail Road
Mr. Moore objected to its passage, --desiring
information as to how far the Corporation was
bound, and why the deed of trust given to it
was not received in time to prevent a subse-
| quent mortgage to override 1t. .. ...
Mr.. Houston said there was the law, and any
person could see the obligation of the Corpor-
alton. He used his endeavors to obtain the
passage of the bill, because it was the only way
to have the Long Bridge retained. If that bill
had not passed, the bridge would have been
removed long ago. ~.
Mr.. Riggs could not vote on the bill, because
he held some of the bonds. Money was got
from him on them The money was loaned
to the Mayor of Washington, not to Mr.. Len
nox, as Treasurer. The guarantee was sub
mitted to him and his counsel 1t was the
duty of the Corporation to see the money pro-
perly applied. The question is notthe legality
of the operation, but whether this Council shall
repudiate the obligations Of former councils.
He conceived that the trustees of the Corpora
| ton should have seen the mortgage properly
recorded. He understood the subsequent ne
gotiation was to release the Corporation bonds.
Mr.. Fowle, getting into difficulties, recorded
his mortgage and seized upon the road to Sc
cure himself Mr.. Fowle knew of the lien of
this Observation-Disclosures he believed
Fowle's mortgage did not supersede the mort
gage of the Corporation. Nevertheless, the
Corporation falling to properly secure the
bonds Of such be the case) is legally bound to
the holder of the bonds. -.
Mr.. Moore did not desire to repudiate, but
wanted to know why this Corporation should
assume the responsibility of $4,000 of bonds
guaranteed: for, to reco gnize this amount,
binds the Corporation for the whole He
wanted an inquiry instituted as to what ex-
tent the Corporation is bound 1t is matter
of interest to the people to know how far this
road had complied with their obligation. He
thought the matter should be referred to a Sc
lect committee, and offered resolution to that
effect
Mr.. Houston denied that the matter was
forced through councils. 1t was discussed
time and again. 1t was fair business trans
action. If Mr. Fowle had priority-the road
is worth both mortgages.
Mr.. Moore quoted proceedings of Councils
to prove that the bill was hurriedly passed,
again asserting that he would not repudiate.
Mr. Dove did all he could to defeat the bill,
but the public were informed by the action of
the boards that the bonds were guaranteed,
and he was for sustaining the obligations of the
Corporation. Although the laws may have been
wrong, noao is not the time for inquiry-that
time has gone by. The credit of the Corpora
ton is in danger, and he was for sustaining it.
The holders of these bonds must not be the
losers
Mr.. Smith denied the assertion of Mr.. Moore
that the bill was hurriedly passed. The bill
was thoroughly examined He regarded the
bill as a link connecting the city of Washing
ton with the rich valley of Virginia. The bill
was passed as matter of policy. He believed
the bill would result to the interest of the Cor
poration. If Mr.. Fowle's deed Of trust has
precedence, it is not the fault of the bond
holders, and they should be paid.
Mr.. Evans said the recording of deeds of
trust was for the benefit of honest creditors,
but if deed of trust should be recorded prior
to a former deed the holder knowing of such
deed, such record does not give him priority
| Mr.. Smith demurred to this explanation of
| the law-but no matter how it was, he was for
paying the bonds DUE
Mr.. Moore was astonished that Council
should demur to further examination, for if
the transaction is fair, the inquiry can't hurt
anybody.
Mr.. Goddard believed, from the beginning,
that the Corporation would have to pay those
bonds, though he thought it probable, that he
would have voted for the bill had he been in
Council. He thought it due to the people to
understand all about the transaction. He
hoped Mr.. Moores resolution would pass
Mr.. Moore, after Messrs Clark, Miller, and
Dovehad spoken in favor of the passage OF the
bill, again denied saying anything about re-
pudiation, all he wanted was to have the peo-
pie informed
Mr.. Houston admitted that there had been
malfeasance (Mr. Evans denied it, Before
the bonds were issued a regular mortgage was
legally signed, and he acknowledged and gloried
in the part he took in obtaining the passage of
the bill.
Mr. Smith, as Mr. Houston took so active a
part in the passage Of the BILL and was one of
the committee to see the guarantee properly
guaranteed, he therefore, himself was guilty
Of the malleasance he charged.
Mr.. Houston deny it.
Mr. Riggs. The second lien is only about
$4,000, and cannot jeopardisc the road He
believed there was property enough to pay
more than Corporation mortgage. The money
was loaned to the Mayor for the Corporation.
Shall we rcpudiatc because the corporate au-
|