Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1873-01-26
MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS.
The Old Board Out and the New Board In
Proceedings of the City Council.

The Old Board Out and the New Board In.
Proceedings of the City Council.
The old Board met at the hour disignat-
ed at Friday nights meeting, His Honor
J. S. Van Glider in the chair, and the fol-
lowing proceedings were had:
Messrs.-Gilbert, NJ. D. Sullivan, Atkin,
Waters, Pat. Sullivan, Munson, Park,
Lewis, Kern, Henderson, Rayl and Yard
ley, were present.
On motion of Mr.. Henderson, the old
Board adjourned sine die.
EX-Mayor Van Glider then read the
names of the new Board elect, and after
the qualification of Mr.. VIM. Rule as
Mayor, by the Recorder, conducted him to
the chair.
Mayor Rule then read out the list of the
new Board, who presented themselves and
were duly qualified by the Recorder, rs
follows:
LIST Ward-Gilbert and Atkin.
I'd Ward-BaXter and Logan.
Sd Ward-Glass.
4th Ward-Fouche and Park.
9TH Ward-Yardley and Livingston.
9th Ward-Kern and Henderson.
9Th Ward-Sullivan and Warters.
Sth Ward-Carpenter and Camp.
The Mayor then made a few remarks,
a majority of the intelligent voters of the
city to administer the municipal affairs for
the present year. He trusted and believed
that the animosities engendered by the
late canvass had all been laid aside, and
that all would work together for the gen.
| eral good of the city.
Mr.. Henderson moved that the Board
go into an election of Recorder, and
moved that Esquire White be unanimous
| ly elected, which motion was seconded.
THAT TIE VOTE.
Mr. FIournoy, as the Attorney of David
| Brown, said that he was there ready to
defend his claim to seat in the Board,
stating that he had an affidavit with him
made by man by the name of Kelly, who
| asserts that he voted for Jones illegally
under mistaken idea as to the time re-
| quired to reside in the city to make him q
| qualified voter.
Mr.. Henderson said that they could not
| take any action in the Board until Re
| corder had been duly elected and quail
| flied.
Mr.. Flournoy maintained that the old
Recorder could act until ne W one be
elected, and that as he believed Mr.. Brown
| was entitled to seat in the Board, he
surely had a right to take part in the
election.
L
affidavit be read, which motion on bein G
put to the Board was lost.
Mr.. Henderson renewed his motion in
regard to Recorder White, which was car
| ried and he was duly elected.
Mr.. Yardley then read the affidavit OF
| Mr.. Kelly in regard to his unlawfully
voting for Mr.. Jones, making some few
| remarks on the subject, and moved that
Mr.. Brown be sworn in.
Mr.. Henderson moved, as question OF
order, that as the Recorder had not been
sworn in, that the Mayor administer the
| oath.
Mr.. Jones admitted that according to
the affidavit of Mr.. Kelly, Mr.. Brown
certainly beat him one vote.
DIFFERENCE OF OPINION.
Mr. Henderson read some portions of the
city charter in regard to the legality of the
the old Boards action in appointing new
election in the Third Ward.
Mr. Baxter also read some extracts from
the same charter, showing that the old
Board had reached beyond their authority,
as the charter specified that in case of a tie
| a new election should be held within ten
| days after tie had been declared, while
the Board had appointed day beyond
that time. He was clearly of the opinion
that the present Board should decide on the
question.
Mr. Camp thought that in cases where
the charter was not explicit they must
take the usual mode of procedure, and &C
cOrding to the evidence, he thought Mr..
Brown was entitled to his seat.
Mr.. Yardley thought the present Board
had clear right to decide the matter, and
read some portions of the charter to sub
stantiate his views.
Mr.. Henderson differed, and thought
that it was no contested election but a
tie.
Mr.. Flournoy stated that they did not
claim it as contested election, but that
Brown was elected by the majority of the
legal votes cast.
Mr.. Camp answered Mr.. Henderson,
stating that the pri,n0 .tdcie evidence of
the tie had been rebutted by the affidavit
of Mr.. Kelly and the admission of Jones.
He thought that if Mr.. Brown had not
Mr.. Jones had right to hold his seat I'M
til his successor could be elected and
qualified.
Mr.. Yardley again moved that Mr..
Brown be admitted.
Mr.. Carpenter asked for information in
regard to the legality of the returns.
Mr.. Browns counsel stated that the
returns were legal l)rina .fdcic evidence OF
tie, but were rebutied by the facts after
ward coming to light.
Mr. Henderson thought the Board could
only be guided by the returns.
Mr.. Browns counsel still maintained
that it was no contested election but that
Mr.. Brown was clearly elected by the ma
jority Of the legal votes.
THE QUESTION SETTLED.
Mr.. Logan asked for information as to
whether the sentence in the charter
"When it shall appear that there is tie,'
means from the MarShai's report, or from