New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-06-23

|
examining the authority Of Mayor CONWAY
to make this contract, the following facts are
disclosed:
/. A resolution was passed by the Board
OF Aldermen July 2, 1867, authorizing the
contract.
q The Board of Assistant Aldermen con
Cured il that resolution July %, 1867.
3. Meetings OF the Common Council were
held July 30 and August 3, 1867, and nc
message on the resolution was received from
the Mayor, of approval or otherwise.
4. Council met August 6, and Mayor
Heath's veto, dated that day, of the Rust
resolution, was received and spread upon
the minutes.
S. Board of Assistant Aldermen, February
IL. 1868, passed de nOu0 the Rust resolution.
6. Boar OF Aldermen, March 3, 1868, re-
ferred the resolution to the Streets and
Landings Committee.
| Z. Streets and Landings Committee, Board
OF Aldermen, March "a, 1868, reported favor
8. Upon an attempt to obtain concurrence
OF the Board of Aldermen, March 81, 1868,
to the action of the lower board, the upper
board refused.
| 9. John W. Overall, Secretary. September
IL, 1868, promulgated the original Rust res.
| olutlon, which was vetoed by Mayor Heath
| thirteen months and six days previously, as
| being lin force by virtue of law"
Claimant has stated to the undersigned
that the validity Of his contract rests upon
the fac: that Mayor Heath allowed the char
ter term OF five days to expire before send
ing his veto to the Council. Mayor Heath
| states that although his veto is dated
August =, the resolution was not received
by him more than five days previously, and
| the charter prescribed that the veto term of
five days commenced with the time of re.
cePtiOn by the Mayor.
IF the rpaOlntion woo vo1;d IN rs
law" as Mr.. Overall oertifes to, September
u, 1868, the discovery is due to him, as
both Boards of the Common Council, as
shown by their action, herein numbered 5,
6, and s, were of different opinion. On
the occasions then named, they treated
Mayor Heath's veto as valid and attempted
to re E nact the resolution, but failed.
1t is noticeable in connection with Secre-
tary OveralPs PRONUNCIATION OF the resolu-
ton, that prior to Mayor Conway's term,
whenever acts of the Common Council were
passed over the Mayors veto, or became
laws by lapse of time, the Secretaries of
both boards promulgated such acts In this
case the Secretaries did not do so, but thir-
teen months aud six days after predeces.
tary discovered such veto to be invalid and
by his own certificate alone assumes to put
resolution in force by virtue of law, aud
Mayor Conway entered into a contract that
had once been vetoed, and which, upon
second attempt to pass the resolution, eight
months subsequently, the Common Council
had refused.
These are the facts with reference to the
validity OF the contract under which Rust |
claims from the city. He claims S39 2S7 81,
with five per cent interest from -, 1869. His |
statement of the account shows that he did
work amounting to-. .S4l,762 So
Deduct moneys paid him by the
CITY,. ................. 10, b99 IL |
Balance due him for work done s26, 1872 81 |
Add profits claimed. ............ Is, l25 90 |
Total claim, with interest as
above stated. ....-. $39, 287 81 |
With respect to the profits claimed, Rust
says that he would have made those profits
If he had made wooden dams in the canals
instead Of earthen dams, but admits that he
ton OF the City Surveyor, and he says moth.
ing about how much profit he made upon
those he did construct
Upon the trial of the case in the Fourth
District Court, the Judge, upon the applica-
ton OF Rusi's counsel, appointed an expert,
Mr.. Louis Fl. Pile, to examine and report
how much work Rust had done under his
alleged contract. Mr.. Pile made his report,
hat work had been done amounting in value.
1t the prices in the contract, to. .S25, 704 %
Deducting amount paid by the
CITY, ....................... 10, 500 81
Leaving the remainder due. 80. $40, 1O4 81
Finding no prospect of settlin with Mr..
Bust on this basis, the undersigned believes
hat it is for the interest of the city to con-
est the whole case, and recommends that
he City Attorney be SO instructed.
Administrator.
The report was received and ordered to be {
rinted. 4,
Mr.. Shaw, with reference to Mr.. South
7orth's claim, under discussion at an earlier
eriod of the meeting said he had now be- '
ore him the report of the auditors ap- (
ppointed by the State-Messrs. F. A. .
7ofcy, A. Hero, Jr., and Ilsley-showing
nat the claim was correct. L
Mr.. Bonzano said he had Mayor Conway's
,tter before him, which showed different !
,sult. He wanted to pay Mr.. Southworth,
ut he wanted the opinion of the Admins ,
ator of Accounts that the bill was correct. !
Mr.. Shaw said he was not a notary and I
I'D no means of judging if the charges
ere correct. He relied on the report of ,
le State experts who had examined the bill, {
i'd who knew great deal more about it t
ian he did.
Dir. Bonzano: Will the Administrator of :
counts indorse the report of this COM !
ittee as being entitled to our respect and !
motion. !
Mr.. Shaw knew nothing about it. He was S
erfectly willing, if the gentleman desired
to refer the matter to the Administrator l
Assessments for investigation. u
Mr.. Bonzano said he was not at all desir. c
Is of putting more work on his own Shout t
,rs, but he thought before the Council
oted away nearly forty thousand dollars, Il
lie claim should be reported on favorably a
some officer of their own. He HAD been D
Id that the work was not needed at all,
1t inasmuch as it had been thrust upon t
e city by the Legislature, the city, of
urse, must pay for it; still it was their =
lty to see they paid only fair price. \
Mr.. Shaw remarked that he objected as Il
rongly as theEgentleman himself to liabili- 4
'sthrast upon the city by the Legislature h
I'd audited by State officers, but the Coun- ii
were creatures of the law and must abide 81
: it. He did not think the Council could p
lip themselves with regard to this claim. q
Owever, he was willing to let it stand over a
l the next meeting. Il
Laid over accordingly. u T.
The roll was called on the ordinance as a r.
lole (omitting the Southworth item) and al
e ordinance was declared adopted. u