The day book. [volume] (Norfolk, Va.) 1857-1867, 1866-07-25
Reform Transformed.

We observe IN the Uld DOMINION the ac-
count of proceeding on the part OF a mem
her of the new Council, for which that paper
is responsible We have no hesitation IN
saving, that if the account be as our cotempo-
rary states, it is proceeding which involves
the character of the municipal body and calls
for thorough investigation. The transaction
anproaches in character some OF those which
the public have read Of in larger bodies in
large cities, and is not at all adapted to the
size or morals, which have characterized our
small town.
The present Council were elected upon the
Shibboleth of so-called reform; but this illus
ration is not only discreditable to the body
itself but is fatal to the confidence reposed
by the people in the sincerity of reform pro-
fessions. The entire al ticle in the Old Do
minien is too extended for our space, but we
give the substance Of the transaction to which
it calls public attention. 1t seems that be-
fore the recent election, Chapel street was
ordered to be opened to Bermuda which
would involve the condemnation of lot
owned by Mr. Southgate, which it was stated
by one, the gentleman who urged the measure,
would be small expense, as the lot was OF
very little value In the meantime, this same
Gentleman, member of the Council, who
urged the opening of the street. and the small
value of the lot to be condemned purchased
the lot in question from Mr.. Southgate, for
the sum of 1858, while the writ of dd Quod
dannuns was pending, and then commenced
his opposition to the extension OF the street,
in his position as member of the Council
urging that the lot in question was very val
liable, worth fully $4,000 Meanw lille the
writ is issued and a jury impaneled, which
ultimately awarded damages for part OF
the lot, at 81, $50 being the portion essen
tial to the formation of the street. 't-
We do not see that the other members of
the Council are to be held responsible for the
action of one Of their members in taking ad-
vantage of the occasion of opening street
which he advocated, to make money by the
operation-urging the measure in his position
as a member, upon the ground of the compar-
alive valuelessness of the lot to be condemned,
and when the measure is agreed upon, pur-
chasing the lot, which rises in his estimation
100 per cent. Still we agree that the matter
is of so grave character as to call for investi
CATION by the Council that the matter may come
before the public in an official form. Indeed, if
the statement is not in accordance with fact,and
misapprehension exists as to the real nature
of the transaction, the member implicated, we
presume, will feel called upon, to define his
position and relieve himself OF the odium of
the transaction which the Old Dominion re-
CARDS as by no means reform looking to re-
trencbment, That paper says, in concluding
its notice of the matter:
Then let the Councils investigate fully this
matter, from beginning to end, the conductof
a member in first advocating the opening as
of small expense, when the lot belongs to an
other, and then changing front, after buying
the lot, and opposing his own petition, for no
other reason than to increase the damages to
the city. By whom and of whom could
jury have been composed willing as the re-
port goes,) to allow $4,000 C) damages on
lot just bought for 1858, and which the pres
ent owner in his own petition estimated when
held by another as of small value? The
Councils have full power over their own mem
bers, can rebuke or expel for conduct unbe-
coming their official position, and they owe it
to themselves as well as those who are i'm
peached whether guilty or not by the public,
to investigate an affair which has created sur
prise and Indignation