The Emporia news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1859-1881, 1875-06-25
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY
COUNCIL.

IEcSCHb- MAY Vi Day 1ASo0A - -~N@hNS'1
Davidson, Epstein, Bancroft and Hib-
ben.
Minutes of meeting held May Sd
were read and approved.
Report of police judge for months
OF May and June, showing twelve con-
vietions and $52.95 fines collected, was
filed. Mr.. Nichols here took his seat
in the council.
Petition of w. r. Carlow, George
Williams, w. S. Davidson and Thos.
Taylor, in relation to the house of
Lowe and Nichols, was referred to
committee on streets and alleys.
Petition of F. w. VOlmer to keep
tipping shop on rear end of lots al
and I43 Commercial street, from July
lst, 1875, to January LIST, 1876, was
read.
Mr.. Bancroft moved that the petition
be granted. Motion seconded by Mr..
Epstein. Mr.. Hibben called for the
ayes and nays, with the following re-
suit: Ayes = Baker, Davidson, Ep-
stein, Bancroft and Nichols. Nays
Hibben.
The petition of o. Ptefferle, for IL
cense to keep tIppling shop at lot 12s,
Commercial street, from June 30th,
1875, to December 31st, 1875, was read.
Mr.. Epstein moved that the application
be granted. Motion seconded by Mr..
Bancroft. Mr.. Hibben called for ayes
and nays: Ayes-Baker, Davidson,
Epstein, Bancroft and Nichols. Nays
I-Hibben.
Petition of j. S. Conwell and G. w.
Thurston, for license to keep tipplipg
shop at lot AS Commercial street,
from July LIST, 1875, to December 31st,
1876, was read. Epstein moved that
application be granted. Motion sec
onded by Mr.. Bancroft. Mr.. Hibben
called for ayes and nays with the fol-
lowing result: Ayes-Baker, David
son, Epstein, Bancroft and Nichols.
Nays-Hibben.
The petition of John Fawcett, in Ie-
lation to- sidewalk tax of 1871. on lot
90 Market street, was read.
On motion of Mr.. Bancroft, the
county treasurer was instructed to re-
lease said tax on payment of tax, ten
per cent. annual interest and fee for
release.
Petition of j. N. Campbell for Ii
cense to keep three billiard tables at
lot 135 Commercial street, from July
1st, 1875, to January LIST, 1876, was
read, and on motion of Mr.. Epstein,
seconded by Mr.. Nichols, the applica-
ton was granted.
Mr.. Watson here took his seat in the
council.
Messrs. Lowe and Davidson, of COM
mittee on streets and alleys, reported
in favor of constructing the following
sidewalks: On south side of 9th ave-
nue, from Constitution to Congress
streets, and on west side of Congress
edge of lot 125 Congress street; or
south side of Seventh avenue between
Constitution street and Neosho street
and submitted an ordinance for thu
same.
Mr.. Bancroft moved that the ordi
nance be referred to committee on or
dinance. Motion seconded by Mr.
Nichols. The ayes and nays wer'
called for with the following result
Ayes-Hibben, Bancroft, Watson ant
Nichols. Nays-Baker, Davidson ant
Epstein.
On motion the committee on ordi
name IS was instructed to report on tn
ordinance at the next regular meetin:
of the council.
, Committee on claims submitted Al
ordinance providing for the paymen
; of claims amounting to $5l2.17. Mi
Bancroft moved that the rules be sus
pended and the ordinance considered
Carried. The ordinance was then con
sidered by sections, and adopted by
, unanimous vote.
? Committee on ways and means, t
/ whom was referred the resolution i
t relation to city hay scales, reporte
r be laid on the table. On motion c
1 Mr.. Bancroft, report of committee wa
adopted.
The following report of special com
mittee was filed:
To the Honorable Mayor and CounciEme
Of the City Of EnlpOrtd:
GENTLEMEN The undersigne
members of the committee of citizen
a appointed by the Mayor u. r. Ora
ham) and G. V. Eskridge, Thoma
Morrison and w. w. Hibben, commit
e toe of the council to investigate tn
!, matter of payment for the construC
ton of sidewalks in 1871, beg leave
report
That they are unable to determin
e the actual number and amount "a
O. contract price, of sidewalks laid fo
? the city in 1871, from the fact that a
. the ordinances providing for the con
e struction of the Same provide thu
e sidewalks be constructed GUhere the
# are not noto built, Your committee ar
obliged to rely upon the tax rolls c
1871 and 1872, Us indicating correctl
c the number of sidewalks constructe
), and contract price for the same.
# Assuming that there were no enron
eous sidewalk assessments, the amour
- delinquent on the tax rolls Except i
50 OAC may DC AuOuIuCu "
/, interest on script and treasurer's con
e mission and amount transferred (
general fund), would indicate tn
amount for which bonds should haV
been issued.
The tax rolls show that there was
y delinquency of the sidewalk assess
ments at the date of the issuing of IL
of 81 1882. The amount of bonds is
sued were 81 ,G52.32. Difference, $12S.7 n
As no provision was made in th
n levy for the County Treasurer's CON
O mission for the the collection of til
= tax, and as the levy did not include in
terest which might accrue on scri
Is which was not paid on presentation
l. we conclude that these items togetht
Is with amount transferred to generi
fund are sufficient to account for tt
above difference of $12S.70.
s, So far as we are enabled to ascertain
1t We report that there was probably n
n excessive issue of bonds for the pay
= ment of sidewalks in the year 1871.
Dated May y, A. d. 1875.
p. B. PLUMB,
he Z. NJ. FoRDE,
D. S. GILMORE.
IS MIR. Bancroft introduced the follow
l. ing resolution which was adopted:
~ ResoIoed, That the committee @
n city property be instructed to inuuiI