Daily Republican. [volume] ([Wilmington, Del.]) 1874-1890, 1880-07-16
THE Curx's LEGALsU BUSINESS.
City solicitor lIacalIister's Keport
tO CITY OOunciI.

THE CITY'B AL6USIAEsss
city solicitor HIacalIister's Report
GO city OOuncil.
The following is the annual report q
City Solicitor Macallister which was
presented to City Council last night:
WILMINGTON. Del, July 7, 1880.
To THE Cry CouNcIL OF WILMINGTON
Il have the honor TO submit the fol-
lowing report Of cases in my charge for
the year ending July 7th, 1850. i
James Megary vs.. the Mayor and
Council Of Wilmington. This is al ap-
peal to the Superior Court from judg-
ment against the appellant for viola
ting the city ordinance prohibiting the
keeping OF disorderly house. The
case has been referred under rule OF
Court and will most probably be tried
before the next term Of Court.
John Bowers vs.. the Mayor and
Council Of Wilmington. The case is
similar to the one above mentioned
and has also been referred.
James NJ. Williams vs.. Edmund Pro-
vost, Collector. This Is an action to
rsplevin property taken by ths Col
Hector in payment Of taxes due by the
Wesleyan Female College II was con-
|tinued at the last term OF Court with
leave to amend the pleadinss and Is
not yet at issne. ;,
John Tweed VS.. The Mayor and
Council of Wilmington. This is an ap-
peal from the judgment Of the Mayor
upon a charge Of violating the city or
Idinance regulating the sale OF meats
upon the streets.
William Ruth vs.. The Mayor and
Council Of Wilmington. This case is
similar to the one above mentioned.
Angelo CardineloVs. the Mayor and
Council Of Wilmington. This is an ap-
peal from the judgment Of the Mayor
imposing fine upon the appellant 1911
violating the ordinance prohibiting the
erection Of booths and stands in the
streets of the city without the permit
of the City Council.
The Mayor and Council Of Whining
ton vs.. Philip Lynch. This is an ae
| tion brought by the city to recover
r damages for taking certain stone on the
I property of the city; the case will prob.
, ably be at issue and ready for trial a.
the next term Of court.
; James Bennett vs.. The Mayor ane
Council of Wilmington. This case Ii
now at issue, and will be ready fol
hearing at the next term Of the Court o
{ Chsnoery.
william G. Smith vs.. the Mayor apd
.. Council of Wilmington. This is bill
recently filed to enjoin the city from
, collecting an assessment against the
: complainant for his proportion Of the
, expense Of paving the bed Of VanBurer
: : street above Delaware avenae. A ruiz
! to show cause why the prayer for tn
: Injunction should not be issued wa
: argued before the Chancellor, jun
. 18th, but no decision has yet been an
; Inounced.
The following cases heve been dispos
led of since my last report
n Eliza Harris and Mary Harris, vi
,f The Mayor and Council Of Wilmington
/. Discontinued. -,
l. William A. Murphy, ct. al. vs.. Tn
4. Mayor and Council of Wilmington, o.
al. In this case the court at the las
June term delivered its opinion, affirm
ING the decree af tho Chancellor dismi'
sing the bill. All costs will be paid b
!, the complainants. The opinion Of th
oourt in this case should be printed q
Il ia of the utmost Importance to th
city. submit herewith copy.
irenew the recommendations mad
= in nv last report. think 1t would b
> to the interest Of the City II the mayo
. should be required by ordinance
+ + make an annual report to the Cit
y Council. Such report embodying sue
y recommendations as that ofioer ma
. deem proper to make would be o
q 0reat value to the City Council as tn
y legislative body Of the City.
, As nv term of Office will expire il
l' NAV next I deem It my duty to recon
. mend that the salary Of the City-solici
, y tor be increased. The duties OF tn
i ofice are onerous and responsible an
, have increased so that the almost con
!, stsnt attention Of the City solicitor i
. reauired. Such an important Office cal
b now be properly filed only by q lawye
lof experience and ability, and the sal
y y ary should be sufficiently large to secur
, the services of such person and com
l. pensate him for loss Of private practice
| recommend thorough revision O
the ordinances Of the city, many {
them are obsolete, others are entirel
|inapplicable to the present condition
.. of the city and many others are 80 va
. gue and indefinite as to cause grav
\. difficulties in their enforcement and in
=. terpetation.
r Petitions for curbing, paving sidewalk
and beds of streets and the construc
ton Of sewers should be referred
committees to ascertain whether th
- :, signatures are genuine and are those
ei properly qualified persons. ! have 81
o perienced great difficulty in the trial I
10 cases in consequence Of parties denyin
u their signatures to petitions, and tht
o. the names Of persons sometimes attact
., ed are not owners Of property or al
y otherwise disqualified.
70 The present method Of making al
easements and entering liens for loci
g improvements is in my judgment il
- - adequate and imperfect. Much create
- 7, particularity should be observed |
u matters Of detail, especially in descril
!, ing the property to be charged with th
% p lien and in ascsrtaining with certaint
l. |. the names Of owners. Many Of th
~ liens now standing on the books al
, uncollectable, owing TO the failure I
Council and city officers to follow stric
,s ly the mode of procedure prescribed b
"a the charter and ordinances.
To As the Legislature will meet durin
7 Ink