Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-07-08


. g Feb. :, 1876. .. 10000
g :" July 10, 1873. ..... $4,000
g - Aug. 8, 1873 go. 10000
Assessment on s11, 400, 600 ut 2 per cent.
allowed by act OF 1874, p. L., p. 65, sasS,
900 leaving i balance to be borrowed
without vote of the people Of g, 500.
The above report was made by the ell
tire finance committee, and stands rs tie
only official stdtement Of the amount Of
money borrowed since the adoption of the
new constitution. The assessments for
this year, after the generations arc do
Quoted, reduces our valuation from Sl1,-
400, 900 to about s11 300, GOO, leaving us
but about 81, 900 of u margin to go on with
out recourse to the people. l know there
are individual members of councils who
hold different views from those of the
finance committee signing the above
port, but those individual views have not
been officially formulated, and do not suf
flee me rs proper data upon which to b;i Q
my official conduct in Il matter SD import
ant as this, and therefore feel compelled
to reject them.
The decision of the supreme court i'll -
p. F. Smith, Wheeler ct al. vs.. the city #
city cannot borrow more than , per cent.
on its valuation over the indebtedness #
our city as it existed ON the 1st Of january
1874. The following is an extract from
the decision of the court in that case. Re-
ferring to the phraseOlosy of the act. the
court says:
"This section is not clearly expressed.
Yet it's true meaning, may he SatiIcr, Il
-
to be attained was clearly u limitation
upon the debt of municipalities, and seven
per centum upon the assessed value of tax
able property therein was fixed as the
maximum. The fact was, however, known
to the convention that ut that time the
debt of the city of Philadelphia, and per-
haps some other municipalities, exceeded
seven per centum. In such instances IN
arbitrary provision that there should be
no further increase of the debt might have
worked great injury to the stOpI'ase of
public works already commenced and es-
scntial to the public convenience and wei
fare. 1t was therefore provided, that as
to such municipalities the debt might he
increased three per centum. The main
controversy, however, was as to the MAN.
ner in which such increase should he ac-
cOmplished. Here again the distinction
is preserved between municipalities whose
debt is under seven per ceDtum, and those
in which it exceeds seven per centum. In
the former the municipal authorities may
increase the debt from time to time until
two per centum has been added, provided
the original debt, with the increase does
not exceed seven per centum. After the
two per centum has been added there can
be no further increase without the vote Of
the people. To illustrate The whole
debt is not to exceed seven per centum.
We will suppose the debt to have been two
per centum at the time of the adoption of
the constitution. Two per centum may bc
added by the municipal authorities, making
the debt four per centum. No portion "f
the remaining three per centum can l'e
added without the assent of the electors of
such municipality at a public election in
such manner as shall be provided by
law"
therefore withhold my approval of the
ordinance
1st. Because the statute laws of this
state (acts of 1855 and 1870 were directly
violated in the work on Centre square, and
it is questionable whether the city is
bound by the act of its agents unless done
accOrtlin. to law and
I'd. Because the only competent au-
thOrity Of the city, the finance committee,
have officially declared that the city's i'll
in November last had reached
within IS, 800 of the constitutional limit,
and this proposed loan will carry the i'll
beyond the limit allowable
under the valuation of last year &c, 200, and
about 81, 900 under the valuation of this.
The attention of councils is respectfully
called to Sec. 10, p. 23:,, p. l.. 1874, which
reads as follows "A member who has Il
personal or private interest i'm any measure
o.. bill proposed or pending before councils
shall disclose the fact to the branch of
which lie is a member, and shall not vote
thereon. II such interested member shall
vote without disclosing, his interest in s,icl,
measure or bill, and the same he carried
by his vote, such member shall forfeit his
office.
Very respectfully,
JNO. T. MACGONIGLE, Mayor.
MAYORS OFFICE, July Z, 1880.
On motion Of Mr.. McMullen the ordi-
nance was read, and then the question be-
ing, /" Shall this bill pass notwithstanding
the veto of the mayor:' Mr.. McMulicn
said he believed his honor the mayor to
be perfectly sincere and conscientious i'm
his objections to the ordinance, and he did
not for moment doubt the honesty of the
motives which inspired this message. At
the same time he was inclined To differ
from his conclusions. In the first place, it
is not denied that this work was ordered
by councils; it was performed in good
iaith by the contractors to whom it was
the city is enjoying the bene fit
IF these improvements. Now, said Mr..
McMullen, l do not feel like standing up
here and saying to these men, by my
vote, "Yes, We ordered you to do this
work; you did it according to your prom
se and We are reaping the enjoyment of
it but We had no right to order you to do
it it was against the law, and it is you
who must suffer- Even if we didl pulsue
this course the city would he sued for the
money and have to pay, besides
the amount Of the bills, the expense
Df litigation. In the second place.
large portion Of the money that has been