Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1868-07-29
CITY COUNCIL.
Meeting Of tIle Board Message
Of Mayor LefIWich.
The Nicholson Pavement to
go ON.

aud Aldermen was convened yesterday
evening to receive message from his
honor, Mayor Leftwich.
Present, Hon. Jno. w. Leftwich, May
or, Chairman Swayne, Aldermen CLAN
cy, Johnson, Mageveney, Brown, Cart
wright, Hoist, O'DOnnell, Ruffin, Ciealla,
Lemon, Renner, PassmOre, Motfet, Nc
Davitt ard Ellis.
The Secretary read the following mes
sage from his honor, Mayor Leftwich
MAYORS OFFICE, CITY HALL
MEMPHIS, Tenn, uly 18th, 1858.
To the Hon. Board OF Aldermen:
You have been called together to con-
slider the complaint made by late meet
ing OF citizens against the present plan
of paying for the Nicholson pavement,
and it is desired that such definite action
be taken as will leave no doubt in the
minds of the contractors or the taX-pay-
ers as to your feeling in relation thereto.
l respectfully suggest that the resolu-
ton passed at your last meeting, instruct
ing the Street Commissioners to move
back the fence in front of the residence
of Mrs. Gray, on Main street, be so mod
flied as to allow the City Engineer to
leave such an amount Of ground within
her Enclosure as, in his opinion, can be
done without detriment to the street.
Yours, very respectfully,
JNo. W. DEFFWICH, Mayor.
On motion of Alderman Moffet, the
message was received.
Alderman Moffet moved that the re-
commentator Of the Mayor in regard
to the fence, be CONQUERED in.
Seconded and carried, mem. con.
Alderman MeDavitt introduced the fol
lowing resolutions, prefaeing them with q
few remarks, in which he said that there
seemed to be some trouble among the
citizens about the Nicholson pavement,
aud paying for it. Many were dissatis-
fed with the present mode OF payment
therefor, and we're under the impression
that it was In the power of the Board to
change or break the contract. The con-
tract was made by a former Board,
under a charter from the Legislature,
aud it is not in the power of the present
Board to break it. In view of this he
offered the following preamble and reso-
buttons, and moved their.adoption
WHEREAS, Our predecessors, under an
Il
1886, have let out contracts for the paw
ing of certain streets in the city accord
ing to the terms and conditions of the
act; and,
Whereas, Said contracts have been 10
q great measure completed by the par
ties, and payment has been made to
them by many of the citizens for work
done in front of their property there
fore
ReSolued, That the Board OF Mayor
and Aldermen of the city of Memphis
will adhere to the plan already adopted
for the completion Of the contracts with
the Nicholson pavement.
Resolved, That not having the power
to charge the terms and conditions OF
payment by the owners TO the contract
Ors, the Board will insist that the pay
ment shall be according to the act OF the
Legislature.
The resolutions were seconded and
were put to vote, when Alderman
Passmore stated that committee APP
pointed at public meeting few days
since were present to confer with the
Board upon this matter, and present
their grievances. He requested that the
chairman have hearing.
The chairman asked II any gentleman
had any objection to the committee be-
ing received, and none being raised, Col
Tyler, chairman Of the committee.
stepped forward and addressed the Board.
He went over the whole ground gone
over by ths meeting st the Municipal
Courtroom, detailed the grievances COM
planned Of at that meeting, and quoted
law to prove that the Nicholson pave
ment tax, as now collected, is illegal,
unjust and inCquitable, and appealed to
the Board to break the contract. Col.
Tyler's argument was about the same
that he has advanced in the Ledger in
two instances, was well put, and sounded
very strong, especially the law part.
After he concluded, Alderman Media.
witt arose and said that he had been in
Memphis twenty years, and the present
instance was the second time only in
that period that the Board of Mayor aud
Aldermen had to be instructed in their
duties by committee. He was bitteriv
opposed to the Nicholson pavement at
first, and did all he could against it. even
carrying around a petition against IL
He was convinced now that it was a ne
cessity, that the contract and mode of
paying for it wss legal, and ss near right
as could be got. 1t was the method
adopted by st. Louis, Louisville, Gin.
cinnati and other large cities that used IL
He had consulted with the best LAWYERS
in those cities as to the legality of that
mode OF levyiDg payment for it, and all
informed him that no principle was more
clearly settled, or more plainly laid down
BE proposed that the City Attorney, Col.
Morgan, who was present, should inform
the Board as to the law on the subject as
he understood it.
Col. Morgan came out, and said that
he would speak Of the subject in its legal
bearing, simply. He had nothing to do
with the hardships which Col. Tyler de
tailed. This contract was let out in 1885
and the manner of payment determined
by the Board of 1866 and '67, aeeorIIno
to the charter granted by the Leeisjse
ture. The present Board cannot % bo-
hind this charter and these eontrscts
They have no legal power to alter them
and any other mode Of paying for the
pavement than that provided nv tbe
charter would be illegal and void. This
is not an open question, 'but one that has
been sdjudioated and set at rest in two
cases by the Supreme Court-sae n
HUMPHREYS and Swans Digest. Here.
ferred to the case of the city of Franklin.