Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1871-03-31

Tie PlasRtif-Re Corporsfioa Attorney on tA>
OtAer fAs Case Dssnsssed-A Nev Bin 10
Afrr our report OF the arguments in the in
junction case-Governof Cooke ct al. agt.
Mayor Emery ct aL-elosed yesterday, Mr.. W.
A. Cook further argued for plaintiff tn a. there
was no doubt but that it was the intention Of
the national legislators TO arrest the powers and
functions Of the old municipal government By
ment. In federal legislation all laws take erect
from the moment of their approval, and IL any
act be passed which u in part in conflict With
scted @ ns T pSn sas 30 sI
principle in federal legislation. Any statnte is
implicitly repealed by subsequent act reyis-
this case the same subject after has been re.
vised by the act creating this Board or Public
Works. The powers Of the municipal govern
PARALYzEp AND MADE PowxRLRss,
and have no force whatever. These contracts
have been made under the charter given by
C0nSIess and powers conferred BY subsequent
VOID. The improvement of the streets cousti-
tuted main feature for the necessity for the
passage OF the late law. Now an ordinance max
April cannot be Of any effect in view of the
overs conferIedon the Board of Public Works.
This Is virtually
AN ATTEMPT TO ARREST TIE TOWERS OF
over this city, 10 1t thus that the will of the law
makers is TO be set at defiance? The Board
follows then that these contractors cannot claim
any rights to go on under the authority with
which they assume to act. There can be
NO HARDSHIP
in denying them the right to execute the con-
tracts. ON the DIST OF February, Congress de-
claTed that there should be q Board OF Public
works, and on March 10Th, they enter into these
existence OF new power annalling the power
which gave them the right to execute the work
IN qGesuon. IL IL immaterial whether this
lE mt tx,f1 81
Mr.. TOTEM, ATTORNEY FOR THE CORPORA
followed MT Cook, saving the first important
question that enters into this case is whether
there parties can maintain this action. The
ground assumed by the counsel is that the
Board OF Bubble Works are a quasi govern
ment This act also creates Board of Health.
which board can, with the same proprfety
maintain that they can exercise the functions
given TO them. Ii the corporation, created by
the act of Congress, were in danger OF heinS
damaged il was for that corporation TO see. and
not the Board of Public Works. He denied
mat any tine boards could maintain an action
as quasi 6rpOrstioD; or that the bill inter
Tered with the corporation until the LIST of June
be claimed that the members OF the Board Of
Public Works had qualified prematureIy. If
the powers OF the city terminated they ter mina-
ted when the bill was approved. He referred
to the fact that the ordinances OF the CORPORATION
require proposals be advertised tor in January.
and the contracts to commence in April. and
urged that the Mayor had simply done his dntv
The plaintiffs argue that W
TIE POWERS OF THE CORPORATION HAD TEE
and, if euch was the case, where il the pover IN
protect the interests Of the public? The Bo,rd
OF Public Works can do nothing; for in the 37th
s Sshi ,n ,hey are prohibited from mourning
authorized by the Legislature, ard an appro-
priation made therefor. He claimed that An
in)uncnon conld not issue In case Of this kind.
The plaintiffs claim that the Mayor is exercis-
ing the functions Of an Offic he is not eutltled
to, and the proper mode was by quo ,oarrarto in
court OF Law. After reading the 9th paragraph
superinteDd the work necessary to be done
until the first Of June. The plaintiffs Complain
that the execution Of these contracts will inter
IeIe with their duties He argued that the bin
the Governor until the Arst of June when he
assumed the executive power OF the District
The paragraph in the 41st section which pro-
vides that there shall be no election held in
GeorgetoED, and That no taxes shall be imposed
for general purposes by the cities of Washing
ton and Georgetown, was read. and he con
tenGeI that under that paragraph special taxes
At this point the court adjourned.
To-Day.
This morning IN the Equity Court the hearing
VI the case was resumed and Dir. Totem for the
corporation, further argued that the act con-
that the laws OF the corporation not
inconsistent with the act of Congress would
govern until repealed or modified by the new
government. He could not see how the Iswsio
relation to the paving contracts come into con-
tact with the act of Congress. The counsel
clam that the law gives entire control of the
he did not take IL so he claimed that thev were
required TO make regulations for the repay-
ing OF streets IN pursuance to laws passed
o.. ne legislature. These contracts were ,
not Tor IelSring streets but for improyinS
ne streets. With this the board has MOTH
,ns 10 90 until authorized by law,
sy.- S,sen Iead the act under which the Mayor
7, "a9sl me contracts: and explained at length
the manner III which the work is usually done,
the ccst assessed, &c. He asked il the con-
tracts OF the city were to be declared void be-
cause Board of Pubic Works had been
appointed, If the bonds issued by the corpors-
ton would not also be void? He claimed that
the Law was Intended to stand beside the oil
charter; and the only thing that the corporation
poses. He referred to the powers Of the Board
Of Health UNDER the bill, and asked II that
board had those powers on the 2lst OF February.
at that time. The law then legislated the city
out Of existence at that time. He argusd that
il the law WAS constr ued that the city was de-
priyed Of it's JURISDICTION over the streets at
power now. II seemed to him that il was con-
templated BY the Law that the new government
should 60 into effect only 40 far as was nece.-
sary Tor PREPARING the machinery to commence
work on June LIST. In conclusion, he claimed
that the property holders would not suffer by
the carrying out OF these contracts.
for the plaintiffs, followed Mr.. Totem claim
ing that the suit being in the name of the md
viduals constituting the Board OF Public Works
was properly brought. IL had been urged that
the bill did not 60 into effect until June ist
be argued that laws went into effect immc-
dia'ely on their passage and approval, and "a at
this act in many particulars
WENT INTO EFFECT IMMEDIATELY.
HI read from the act the duties OF the Governor
necessary to be performed before the LIST ,Iay of
June. He read the 9th section OF the bill and
asked II under il the Board Of Public Works
did net come into existence when they were
confirmed by the Senate. He urged that
under the bill they had the control OF streets
avenues, including improvements and repairs.
Unless there was some restraining clause he
could notsee that the Board had not the power
claimed bHe argued that Congress foresaw that
they could not remedy all things at once ana
80 liked the time tor the corpoT alton to cease
June lst, but that 70 remedy certain michief.,
Including the making OF such contracts a. this
TBEIA WENT INTO EFFECT AT ONCE.
He further argued that only for the Sckuowl-
edgment OF the char ter in this act the charter
Of the city would be imperative now He did
not believe that on fair view Of the law the
court could come to any other conclusion than
tnat the government went into power at once.
JUDGE MACARTHUR
sald the principal question, and the one first 10
De determined was whether this board was
quasi corporation or not. This was a very i'm
portant question, not only now, BUT hereafter
TO their successors. II they are not o corpora
ton IN any sense he would be reluctant