Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-03-15
aancaster f,,tftligerlrer.
EVENING, MARCH Is. 1880.
Belgian Blocks.

which may lead to wrong conclusions.
The petition of the property owners Oh the
first square of East King street, made in
May last, was granted after the state
ment made to councils by Major Shenk
that the total cost to the city would not
exceed for the square named 1884, where
as the actual cost reached nearly s., 300.
Evan Mr.. Evans, usually very correct in
financial estimates, thought the cost to |
the city would not reach over $500 or
5000 per square. Mr.. Zecher's motion
prevailed, giving to South Queen, West
King and North Queen streets the same
terms as those granted East King street.
The major has kindly given the mayor
credit for the suggestion of paving with
Belgian block but he has failed to showthe
only point in all this controversy that the
mayor, in anywise, ever recommended to
councils or the street committee to do
this work without first providing the
money, or otherwise in derogatiOn OF
law.
Mayor MacGonigle, we are sure, does
not deny any recommendation to coun-
ellis he may have made in his messages.
If the ingenious major will read the an
nual message of the mayor of 1873, the
one to which he refers in his interview,
under the head of L" Streets" he will
find this important paragraph:
The street department especially seems
to be one difficult, if not impossible, to
keep within the bounds of the appropria-
ton My predecessor said in his last
annual message "All outstanding debts
against the street appropriation have been
paid, and the annual appropriation of ten
thousand (s1O. O.OOO) dollars, running from
June 1, 1877, should be sufficient to place
the streets of our city in good condition,
with the present reduced prices of materials
and labor" The deficiency shows that
the sum was not sufficient. l respectfully
protest against the expenditure of one dol
lar beyond the appropriation unless in case
of emergency. l shall endeavor during
the current fiscal year to give councils
timely notice of the standing of the appro-
priations, and hope that in the case of the
total expenditure of any appropriation,
they will order all work to stop being
done under such appropriation unless alb
solutely necessary.
1t will therefore be seen that the
mayors recommendation in regard to
providing more durable roadway for
our principal Streets was made subject
to the limitation of the appropriation
for street purposes. His whole official
history, in connection with the expendi-
ture of the public money, sustains this,
and only this construction. AS we have
said frequently, he does not oppose Belg-
ian blocking the squares now the subject
of controversy, but he insists that no
committee can pledge the city credit for
the payment of the work after the appro-
priation has been exhausted, without
passing an ordinance to that effect in
conformity with the act of March Is,
1865.
The point at issue is not whether we
are to have Belgian blocks or not, but
whether the street or any other commit
tee can spend the unapprOpriated money
of the tax payers contrary to law. Major
Shenk, in effect, says that the resolution
of councils ordering his committee to do
the work, takes precedence of an act of
the Legislature, which distinctly for
bids him doing it to an extent exceeding
$500, when the appropriation is exhaust
ed, without special ordinance to that
effect. Major Shenk has violated this
law most undoubtedly. He also violated
the act of 1874 in not advertising for the
work on Centre square. He violated
his official obligations when he proceeded
to incur debt in his committee to the ex-
tent that he has after the finance com.
mittee, our official authority, had re-
ported that we were within $500 of the
limit allowed us under the constitution.
The editor of the Era in his re-
marks on this subject also gets
away from the point involved when he
allows himself to speak about the com.
mercial and economic view " of the mat.
ter in dispute. No one denies that " the
paving of the first two squares of North
Queen street with Belgian blocks, on the
terms proposed would be an absolute
economical gain in the saving repairs
&c. But on the other hand we do not
see how the Era came to understand that
the street committee claim authority
for what they propose doing under an
ordinance passed by councils covering all
cases when the property holders secured
the payment of one-half the costs. -
There never was an ordinance passed of
the kind; mere resolution allowing the
street committee to proceed with East
King street under certain conditions was
passed after being amended, as we said
above, according like privileges to West
King, South Queen and North Queen
streets. The mayor has therefore another
strong point" in this fact which the
Era must have inadvertently overlooked.
The Examiners correspondent would
like to know why the mayor did not en-
join the street committee when blocking
East King street and Centre square.
The answer is very easy. East King
street was done while there was yet
money enough in the appropriation to
pay for it, and therefore strictly legal {;
Centre square was let out to Cunning
ham and McNichol secretly. without the
knowledge of the mayor and in violation
of law. The mayor protested against the
job in a message to councils at the time
the work was commenced. He believed
they were the proper authority to call a