The daily gazette., 1878-07-06
The Street Cleaning Job.
A PARTY CAUCUS PUsnEs 1T THROUGH
A JOB THAT IS EXPECTED
TO BENEFIT THE REPUBLI-

~ lnT
CAN PARTY.
The City Council, last night by strict
party vote, repealed the ordinance re-
curing the cleaning OF the streets TO be
given out by contract, and res ored this
portion of city labor to the control of the
Street Commissioner and the Street Com
mittee of Council. Mr.. Baker alone, of
the Republican members, was opposed
to the measure, and voted against it on
several test motions, but befoi e it was on
its final passage he left the Council cham
ber.
The ordinance, as at present tinkered,
provides that the removal of ashes, gar
bage and offal shall be performed by
contract, but that the cleaning Of the
streets shall be done under the control
and direction of the Street Commissions
er. The Commissioner stall also attend
to the removal of ashes, garbage and
offal until the contracts for this work are
awarded.
The ordinance was being read by the
Clerk, but when he had read the second
section Mr. Norton said 1t did not read
Ike the same ordinance that was intro
duced and read two weeks previous.
Mr.. Windle claimed that he had a
right to amend an ordinance on its third
reading.
Mr.. Taylor thought it looked as if the
ordinance had been amended by the gen.
tleman himself, or by others.
Mr.. Lynch wanted to know why the
amendments were not offered in due
form, or as a substitute for the original
ordinance.
Mr.. Paynter claimed that the ordi-
nance under consideration was not the
one that was originally introduced, and
had not been properly before the Law
Committee.
Mr.. Windle insisted that it was custo-
mary to amend ordinances on their third
reading.
Mr.. Paynter assented to this view, but
insisted that the amendm ents must be
offered az such.
Mr.. Norton thought it looked very
much as though the ordinance was
10 be railroaded through Council,
Mr. Taylor insisted that the ordinance
under consideration had not been read
twice, and had not been approved by the
Law Committee. He made pOint of
order to this effect.
The Chair replied that the Clerk said
the ordnance had not been out of his
hands since twas signed by the Law
Committee.
Mr.. Chandler said it had been thought
necessary to add some amendments to
the original ordinance. but they had all
been approved by the City Solicitor.
Mr. Taylor inquired if the ordinance
was the same one that was introduced
two weeks previously.
Mr.. Chandler-The head is the same.
Mr.. Paynter said the new ordinance
had been handed to him 10 sign, as a
member of the Law Committee, and he
signed it, supposing IL was the one origi-
nally introduced. He had therefore been
deceived.
Hr nxrln oclyaI ClnrIr
from the minute book, the record of the
first appearance of the ordinance.
The Clerk replied that the present or
dinance was the same one that was origi-
nally introduced, but that it was not ON
the minutes.
Mr.. Hazlet said he never before knew
of a committee amending an ordinance.
Council alone can do that.
Mr.. Wiudle claimed that the ordinance
was regular and correct; that he had a
perfect right, after the secoud reading of
an ordinance. to make any amendment
or alteration he pleas d.
Mr.. Taylor objected to this assumption
of power. He sad that a paper was
broughtin for the first time and offered
for third reading The gentleman has
right to introduce an amendment but
he has not done so.
Mr.. WIndle-I do Introduce it as an
amendment.
Mr.. Taylor-No you don't; you call the
ordinance up for third rea,ting and
have the amendments read as though
they We're original sections.
The chair here dt cidtd that Mr.. Tay-
lor's point of order was correct, and that
the additions to the ordinance would have
to be offered as amendments.
The amendments were then proceeded
with until section 7, which provides for
The cleaning of the stree Is under the d.
rection of the Street Commissioner was
reached.
Mr.. Norton Questioned the necessity
for any change. The oniy trouble with
the present system was that it did not
make enough Republican votes. Under
| the proposed change poor and deserving
men would not get jobs, but only those
who wers supposed to have political in
| tiuence. If man said Mr. Norton is not
| suffi ciently well thought of by the people
of his own Ward to be sent to Council
without getting up such jobs as this, he
ought not to be here. This is nothing
but piece of political trickery.
Mr.. Johnson said there was nothing
political in the proposed change. The
streets had not been properly cleaned
during the past year, under the contract
| system, and change was desirable.
Mr.. Taylor considered the ordinance a
political measure. 1t was very strange
| for the author to bring it into Council
| upon the very night that the proposals.
were received for cleaning streets uuring
the ensuing year. There was plenty OF
| time during the winter to have consider
ed this change, but here the whole mat
| ter comprising eight or ten sections is to
be rushed through in one night. He
| thought past experience had proved that
politics IN city work worked no advau-
| tage to either party. The contract sys-
| TEN had saved the city some $1,000 last
year, and it would be advantageous to
continue.
Mr.. Windle claimed that he offered
the ordinance because the contract sys-
| tenn did not work well that the streets
Were not properly cleaned, and the con-
tractor did not properly perform his
work.
Mr.. Norton thought contractors should
be required to give ample security, and
the sureties be neld up to the mark. If
the contractor failed to do his work the
Street Commissioner and the Street
Committee were to blame.
Mr.. Lynch did object to the manner in
which the last contractor worked, but
thought he should be held up to his
work. To do away with the contract
system would increase the expenses, and
it was wrong to spend the peoples
far FL 81, L 1.