Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1874-03-10
WHO'S RIGHT ?.
Something Further Concerning the
Finance Committee Matter

| something Eurther concerning TIT
Finance Committee Matter.
| Our readers are aware that some ten day
ago. the Mayor discharged COuncilmeI
| Gaut, Luck and Lindsey from the further
discharge Of their duties as members Of ia,
| Finance Committee, and they are alSC
aware that the gentlemen referred TO said
in substance, '.no you don't" and calleC
upon City Attorney Martin to trot out the
| law in the premises, meanwhile continuing
| to serve on the Finance COMMITTEES.
4 meeting of said committee was held
YESTERDAY afternoon, at which time it was
hoped Mr.. Martin would be heard from. but
owing to the press of city business in the
courts which demanded his attention, he
was unable TO report. In the absence
of a report from the City AttOr-
ney. however; the committee were not lefl
without a document TO discuss, as tire
Mayor sent in his billet dOLr:
MAYORS OFFICE, March Q. lS74.-Hon.
W. A. Gleaves, Chairman Finance Com
mittee: / hereby take this opportunity Of
informing YOU that have deemed it proper
TO reduce the Finance Committee from
eleven to eight in number, making said
committee stand as follows. ". 4. Gleaves,
chairman; McGayOck, McCrea, Breen,
Eakin, Cheatham, PentecoSt and Literer
In so revising said committee, | will assure
the gentlemen thus left off that it was not
done through any diScourtesy or disreSpect
to those gentlemen; for each of them have
ever entertained the highest regard and
full esteem-so much so. in fact, that in
the last election placed their names upon
MY tickets and electiOneered for them all
could, and was glad they were elected to
TO the Council. Ny sole reason, then, for
my action in the premises was to
REDUCE THE COMMITTEE
down to or near the old standard in pre-
viOus years, and to put it on a more active
and efficient basis for tranSacting business.
| believed when | formed the committee OF
eleven that it would prove to be too large
and unwieldy, and would impede its ELI
cheney for working; but at the personal re
quest Of the gentlemen two Of them were
put on, which would otherwise not have
been done. The committee now contains
more members than are in the Board of
Aldermen. believe that one Of the great
essentials to the efficiency of a committee
is to have it composed of sensible men and
Of as few members as possible. Now, the
law does not limit the Mayor to any partic-
ular of members who shall constitute this
committee, but it is left entirely TO his dis
CretiOn and judgment. | could have formed
this committee consisting only of three, five
or eight, should | chose to have done so;
but having reserved the right To change or
alter the committee at the time il was
formed. l claim that ! have the right 10
modify il, and that my action is both legal
and parliamentary, because it was not
permanent committee for the municipal
year, but only a conditional committee,
should any cause arise for its change. If
il were not TO- the right reserved to change
or modify the same, then probably my power
over it might be exhausted. The gentle
men who are now left off accepted the on
said committee, knowing the fact that had
so reserved the right to make change at
any time; and they having done so certain
" certainly take advantage of the change.
This change was only made for the purpose
of reducing the committee to more active
and efficient working number, and have
no doubt but that the interests of the
peopIe will be as well protected in
the hands of eight as it could be in eleven.
In the formation of the committee of
eight only one member is proposed to be
tdhtu HUH GdCii NtlAu tfANiA uP ~ NAc1tAt'
Whereas, as it was at first formed, there
were three members from the fifth ward
and two from the seventh ward, and in
making the reduction, have retained the
member from each Of said wards, whom
/ believed from matuTer years, longer life,
and more experience, were better qualified
TO act upOn the committee than either Of
those proposed to be removed l very much
regret that so much has been said and any
hard feelings arisen on this question, for |
am willing to be qualified that | have not
in the least been actuated by anything but
the kindest and most friendly feelings.
As this matter has somewhat taken a wide
range, through the daily papers, hope that
/ will be paTdoned at this point for
A SMALL DIGRESSION
from the subject. Mr.. Gaut stated, in an
interview with the Banner reporter, that
he could not conceive of any reason for my
action unless it was ON account of his
going against the reduction of bank stock.
etc. Now for Mr.. Gaut's information and
the community at large, will here state
that he and myself do not differ on that
question, for l am of the opinion that tie
stock of the bank should be taxed, for
what it will bring in the market, the same
as a mans house and lot. Again-If Mr..
Gaut is correct why should desire to re-
move Mr.. Lindsey, who took the position
and read an elaborate opinion that the
bank stock should not be taxed at its mar