New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1871-04-28


ssss 3 sss.ss 8asssss sssss
Il great far ~ the peopas = that ~ VIII d
nothing. Better make = nista1s thaa d
nothing. think one Of the most danger
ous thines NO could do would 10 to light
this law ~ > whole, and ono sf TIE best
things We could do would be to adept those
parts which arc Of imminent pressing neoes
sity. Nobody disputes the necessity Of .
protection levee. sas ~ 4
fMr. Delassize was called to the chair
Mr.. Shaw resumed: The Mayor goes on
to say that . contractor who doea tit get
control Of his contract is going TO sue fol
damages. Iwould like to know who is 20
ing to get the most damages, the city or the
Mexican Gulf Canal Company. Ny PROPOSE.
ton is that the company shall have the
least possible damages to sue for.
The next extraordinary objection is to
the use of the word 4entirons" in connec-
| ton with the fact that some levee has to be
made in the town Of Carrollton, and that
the bill does not sufficiently provide for
reclamation. The act says we shall locate
these lines. Suppose our interest requires
that We should 60 above Carrollton. viii
that in any way affect our liability 1t is
very possible we may have to 60 out Of this
parish to protect this parish. The act pro-
vides that all lands not within the drainage
districts, reclaimed by this act, shall be
taxed two mills. This parts6f the law may
be valid or may be not; but if it is not it is
still our duty to locate this levee where our
engineers tell us it ought to be located. l
have no doubt that, eventually, Carrollton
will form part of the city of New Orleans.
Next the Mayor goes on to make some
statements on my side Of the question. He
acknowledges that the whole mathematical
estimate Of the work laid down is two mil
lions Of dollars, and quotes the City Attor-
ueyia support Of that opinion. / hope it
may be 20; hope the Mayor is right. be-
cause if the works only cost two millions Of
dollars that is mere bauble in comparison
to the results attained. The Mayor has
quoted the Claiborne canal. That is within
the Metairie Ridge, and is not one of the
class Of works which form the expensive
parts of this contract. 1t is presumed that
this company shall make money somewhere.
1t is presumed that if part Of the work is to
cost dollar and . half, some other parts
will cost less. / am sure Ican put my hands
pon specifications to show that the work on
Claiborne canal almost ruined the gentle
man who performed it, and he il willing to
certify he would not take this work at fifty
cents per cubic yard. --------------
The next objection is that this ordinance
will cost us fifty thousand dollars month,
which hope is true, because / do
hope that this company will throw
up one hundred thousand cubic
yards of earth month, and then there
follows something about the assets
and only capital of the company consisting
of bonds of the State, Of which bonds the
city pays one-half their face value. don't
know anything about that statement. l
don't know what it has to do with this sub
ject, if it happens to be true; but if it is
true, l think we are going to get back some
Of our advantages from these bonds that
the city pays part of.
The final conclusion of the message is just
what l would wish, because it takes back all
that the Mayor has previously said. The
grand objection of the Mayor is this: that
the ordinance is not an acceptance of the
act. Therefore the Mayor takes back the
whole of his message, which is based
on the assumption that it is an &C
ceptance, and that when we enter
upon any part of this contract we
accept the whole. Thus the labor of the
whole message from the beginning to the
end goes MP. 1t is all mistake. 1t is not
an acceptance. When said to the Council
that to enter upon the work would be a
tacit acknowledgment of the validity of the
act, in that supposed was right. / said
if we blindly went into this thing and gave
the company no notice it would be a tacit
acceptance of the act, and it might be con-
sidered that we adopted the whole. But
when we say distinctly in this ordinance,
from beginning to end, that we do not do
that, then it is very different affair. They
know what they are doing. They 60 to
work at their peril; and when the Mayor
says we must act according to our best
judgment, l, for one, concur in the judg-
ment of the majority of the Council that
the best thing to do is to accept SO much Of
the work as is advantageous, so long as it
does not prove of injury to the city. On
that view am prepared to vote for the
ordinance, the veto of the Mayor notwith-
standing. =;
The Mayor took the floor and said: l
would like to have the privilege of saying
one or two words, because the Admins
traitor of Public Accounts has misquoted,
Internationally no doubt, many statements
Of my communication, and he has entered
Q good deal into other matters as to my
course in this Council. He has said q good
deal about my Occurring" as he demon
mated it, in times past, and informed the
Council and those now present that they
had put up with it, because, no doubt, the
Mayor "meant WELL" thank him for that
admission. thank the gentleman and all
the other Administrators associated with
him for their forbearance. Mr.. Chairman,
You know full well that have been specific
in my objections to needless expenditures