The Evansville journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ind.) 1866-1870, 1870-10-03

were IN several instances unoerDl9
abroad. Internally, it is designed anu
adapted to be made as commodtous, COM
plete and elegant a structure as any OF Lne
kind in the West. We give THIS not ~ on. OUT
opinion Alone bat as the unan1mousJuQS-
ment OF men of professional and travelled
experieace who have examined the plan
and arrangements OF the ssage ana Sa auq he
completed in q style worthy OF us oS1
sign, and of its exterior beauty Will
depend upon the uberality of the pub
propose to make our appeal by reopen
Ing our stock sub scription BOOKS, ana per-
haps by other means. We need not re-
mind your Honorable Board of the OBJ
stacIes to success we have reason 10 anhc-
ipate. Now, if the importance OF psesenL-
ing our enterprise TO the people unuer Inc
most favorable circumstances possible, as
one means OF doing this, ana pc
cause in the success OF our enoLI tne
whole public is interested, we respect
fully petition your Honorable Boaro' as the
representative of the public TO give US us
aid and encouragement py renllL t 7 LIZ
license and taxes upon the Opera Rouse
for the term of I'VE years. lie asks ILLS
with the greater confidence from the Wen
known fact that many of our sister cues
az the West. by like concessions, have long
since secured improvements ana emoe.-
lishments which are yet amongthe crying
wants of Evansville.
EVANSVILLE, Dec. 8, 1857.
r. Z. Carson, Mark & HenniDg, Morgan
Putnam q CO.. L. Lowenthal & Co., AFRO
Dyer, James Smell, Thos. Z. Gavin, Minor
& DaiIam, II. o. Babcock. Warren q Con-
yngton, Victor Bisch, Henry Q. Gwath-
mey, John ID. Roach. Geo. y. SOnntag
Co.. F. c. Ehrman, W. Nj. Akin, D. ].
Mackey, Alex. Darling Z. g.. Van Ripper,
Geo. H. Fish, Il. {. Mtngst. Osborn Rellly'
Preston Bros, p. SemOntn, r. K. bunker
son, 1. & d. Holman, j. I, q 3. A. Coolidge.
Meyer & Bros, Carpenter, White & Baker,
VIM. e; French g CO., Th0s. seantlIn g
On motion the foregoing petition was
referred to Councilmen Jones and steele.
Mr.. Chandler then read the report
Of said committee, made to the CoWn-
ell, September 18th, 1868, that in
their opinion the Council had no ju-
risdiction to grant the petition as to
taxes, but recommending that it be
granted so far as the exemption of
license was concerned; also the order
of the Council of the same date, ap-
proving and adopting said recon
mendation.
1t was then proved that
with the aid and encouragement of
said exemption from license, the
Opera House Company proceeded to
obtain the necessary additional sub
scription of stock, and thereby COM
pleted the Opera House as proposed
in said petition.
1t was admitted that since the pass
age of said order, no license had been
demanded by the city authorities for
performances in the Opera House un-
til Sept. q, 1870, when, in accordance
with the order Of Council of Sept. 26,
1870, purporting to rescind said order,
| this demand was made; and defendant
proved that on Sept. 18th the Opera
House Company entered into a writ
ten contract with him for the rent of
the house, including license" for the
18th, 9th and 18th days of Septem-
Der, 1870.
1t was further admitted that the
late Mayor Walker departed this life
Sept. 8. 1870.
Mr.. Kumler relied upon the ordi-
nance of April Both, 1859, imposing a
license on ANY theatre, museum or
other show" etc., "of not less than
three nor more than twenty dollars
for each day, at the discretion of the
Mayor, and, In his absence, of the
Treasurer, and, in the absence of both
Mayor and Treasurer, then of any
two of the Councilmen," and insisted
that it was not competent for the
Council to repeal the same, except by
ordinance, aud that it being in full
force the defendant was subject to its
provisions, whether he exhibited in
the Opera House or elsewhere in the
city.
The points made by Mr.. Chandler
were as follows:
First. That it was entirely compe-
tent for the Common Council of 1868
to contract with the Opera House
Company, or with the citizens, that,
In consideration, they would sub
scribe the additional amount of stock
necessary, and complete the building,
they should be exempted from IL
cense, and that the Council might
make said contract by ordinance or
simple order.
Second. That the resembling order
could not affect the present defendant,
because the Company had entered
into contract with him, by virtue of
the Councils authority, to exempt be-
fore the date of said resembling order.
Third. That, even if these positions
were not sustained, still the proscu-
ton must be dismissed for the reason
that the demand for ten dollars, as
the price of the license, was made By
an unauthorized person, Mr.. Van
Ripper having no power, as Mayor or
sum as the price of license; that the
order of the Common Council, given
in evidence by the prosecution, IN
terms, appointed him President of
that body, only during the absence of
the Mayor, and upon the Office be-
coming vacant by his death,
said order expired by its own
limitation. Mr.. G. cited Sections
oath and 29th, of the City Charter, as
strictly in accordance with this view,
contending that since the death of
Mayor Walker the city had no Mayor
or other officer clothed with the func-
tons and powers of a Mayor.
Mr.. Kumler replied that Mr.. Van
Ripper had the power, as de fdcto Pres
dent of the Common Council, and to
the other points made, and the Court
took the case under advisement.
And on Saturday, October LIST, the
Recorder decided the case in favor of
the city; whereupon Mr. Chandler,
for the defendant, appealed the case
to the Vanderburgh Circuit Court,
where the question of Mr.. Van Riper's
authority to act as Mayor of the city
of Evansville will be judicially deter
mined.
@=Ensz1EzEa4zHa1@1E
Communicated.