Evening star., 1866-10-24
Cnrnnration Arfair..

hieo. ohf iL 10 u Tf'cOtI-ou %
board enclosing letter from Mr. 1i~otg- Mat
ungly, staune IN NJ hotel coaches are ailo we'd
Go land and receive passengers At the edge OF
me pIank way OF The OH street wharf. The line
where the private property OF the company
CON mences. He furtfer states thar the goy-
eminent has possession Of the wharf rDd nas
given orders " hich are executed by The en-
pIoy eee) hat no vehicles ofsany descriI,tion be
allowed on the wharf excerpt the smai0uees
and wagons for through passengers and bag
gag; rrftrred.
Mr. Moore introduceda bin making appro-
prstions for the support of the pu Sltc schools,
appropriaung s506sof for the pas ment OF teach
eis and s49.l $50 Tor ali other expenses iDclud-
irg s22-CO0 amount OF unexpepded appropria-
non OF last year; the bill Was passed. rhs
hill makes abe same appropriations as the
Aldermen's hall heretofore rejected by tue
lower EoaTd.J
The following were introduoed:-By Mr..
Mulloy-Petiuon OF John Dwyer, for me re-
mission of nne. By Mr.. Marehe-Rssolu-
ton requesting the Mayor 20 In form the board
" hat amount OF fines have been collected mp
70 the close of the last nscsl year. passed. By
Mr.. Mead-Blll 10 repair gutter on east eide OF
LIST street east from & 10 - north.
Mr.. Wright moved to take up the bill giving
the Richmond, Fredericksburg and Potomac
Railroad Company permission TO erecta horse
railroad track on Water street, from NJ 10 ~
streets south. Mr.. Wright said that the main
opposition TO the biii was because the company
dld not accept the proposition OF the Metro
politan Company. 20 build the track NJ the X.
I. snd Z. Company would take S4O,UOO worth
Of their stock
Mr. Moore expressed the hope tha, the bill
would be taken up. His motives had n second
time been assafled, and he wished 70 reply TO
what had been said IN reference 70 his motives
As he intended toreply to Mr.. Peugh. the Vice
President. he suggested that some other gentle
man be called 10 the char.
The bill was taken M; Mr.. Joyce in the
chair.
Mr. Moore repeiIed all intimatious tha, ms
course had been prompted by personal mo-
uyes. and said thar in relation 20 the question
he now stood as he did in lS57 and 1855. As
1~dc ANN Fsa~x, - ng...
Railroad Company, by whom be is employed,
but IN which he does not own any stock, ne
had not heard one Of the officers say that they
wished the bill defeated
Mr.. Moore proceeded TO state that Mr. Mat
nngly first made a proposition TO the Metro
polIian Company verbally, and subseq uently
addressed the Company in writing, the Com
pany having then charter 10 run a track
down az street. The President frankly in
formed Mr.. Mscingly Of the condition OF the
Company, and Showed that the Company was
not then able 10 lay the track. He also said that
If they lald this track they would have 10 issue
so0.uo worth OF stock. and he proposed IL the
Company would take s4O,OOO OF that amount
they would build the track. ThIss was the
transaction which had been referred 20. The
author OF the bill was one OF the Aldermen of
the seventh Ward. That gentleman would not
allow IN his paper room for has Mr.. Moore,s)
remar ks or amendments the report OF the
Boards proceedings, but found room for lmpu-
,s ,suohs n.n on ms mouyes, Al the very moment
the Board the thor OF the bill was a stock
holder and director. If the insinuation of per-
sonal motives could apply TO him the same i'm
putauons could apply more strongly 10 the au-
thor of the bill.
Mr.. Wright said II was the fret time ne had
heard that the Alderman from the Seventh
Ward was a stockholder and director in the r.
r. x +. Co.
Mr. Moore said that be did not mean TO saw
that the Aldermen was connected with that
road, but he was connected with the Wash
ington ana Georgetown Railroad Company
which would reap the benefit of this bill
He proceeded TO speak Of the question OF wa
ter rights.
Mr. Wright called the q tention of the Board
10 a bill having passed about the close OF the
last Council, providing for the building of a
sea wall from 7rh 10 9th streets, in whish Mr.
Moore did not offer any such amendments as
be had offered 10 this bill He thought the gen.
ueman Mr.. Moore) was inconsistent.
Mr. Moore suggested that the bill referred
may have been acted on when he was out
OF the chair or IL may have escaped his no
tice.
that time, and the gentleman could hardly have
failed TO nouce the provisions OF a bill ne read.
The argument OF the gentleman reminded him
OF the dog in the manger. We will not build
the wall ourselves or let others do 1t.
MI. Peugh said he was sorry that the evening
had been spent In listening TO dissertation as
10 water lots. The company were not asking
about water lots. They ask for whatl For
the privilege Of building street for Washing
ton, for Its use for ten years. Yet the gentle
man has been telling you about water lots and
the views OF Mr.. Force and ohers-all inter-
esting enough, but out OF place. Sifted OF its
yerbiage. the argument is that the Corporation
have no right TO grant this privilege, and vet
the gentleman says on certain conditions he
Will give this privilege. What has water lots
70 do with a railroad In July, 1854. the Metro
poltan road obtained charter, and immedi-
ately they got parties interested an cutting
down streets, so they could run n road. They
led people TO believe that the cost would be
[ining, but the people found that instead OF
that in some cases IL cost $3.50 instead of S25.
After this the company attempted TO defeat a
bill OF this kind which will benen the people
Mr Moore said that the railroad company
did most OF the cutting on r street ar their own
expense. and he denied that they were opposing
this bill.
Mr.. Peugh remarked that he considered it
unnecessary TO offer an amendment but TO
meet the views of some members he would
oner an amendment providing that no other
rights or privileges should be granted but what
are mentioned in the bill.
The vote was taken on Mr. Peugh's amend
ment; which was lost: Yeas-Meesrs. Calvert,
Dudley. Marche, Peugh, Walker, wright-e.
Mead, Morsell, Mulloy, NaIley, Peake, Simms,
and the President, Mr.. Moore)-Il.
The substitute was taken up, and
Mr.. Peake moved 10 strike out in the second
proviso the word "ali," and insert majority
so as to require the consent OF a majority OF
the property owners bordering on the street
Mr.. Moore said that the petitioners eonsti-
tuted a M ajority.
Mr Marehe said that the object of the provi-
out the last proviso; lost-yeas 6. nays IL.
Mr.. Wright moved TO striKe out the two lines
in relation TO obtaining the consent OF the
property owners.
The Chair (Mr Moore) ruled the amendments
out of order.
Mr.. Wright appealed from the decision OF
the Chair.
The Chair was sustained.
Mr.. Baker moved the pre- vfous question.
Mr.. Marche moved 10 adjourn; lost-yeas 1,
nays 10. 81.
The previous question was not ordered; yeas
5, nays 9.
Mr. Peugh moved TO amend the substitute so
that Its provisions would conform TO the char
tiers of other roads. .sr
+, Mr.. Morsell moved TO strike out the Rrst
proviso; lost-yeas 6, nays IL
The substitute was then adopted after being
amended by Mr.. Moore, so as 10 allow the
road 10 be used for conveying passengers only,
and providing that at the expIration Of ten
years the improvements shall become the
property Of the Corporation, free OF cost or
charges. by the following vote:
:. feas-Messrs. Baker. Drury, Joyce, Mead,
Morsell, Mulloy, Nalley, Peake, SimIls, WAL
ker, and the President Mr. Moore)-lL
Ndys-Messrs. Anderson, Calvert, dudley,
Marehe, Peueh, Wright6.
Mr.. Wright moved to lay the bill on the ia