Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1881-03-03
CITY COUNCILS.
MEETING OF MUNICIPAL FATHERS.

Solicitors Report-The Treasury Troubles
Estimated Receipts aud Expenditures
for Next Fiscal Yexr-EundlnS
the City Dcbt-The BlS Gas
Bill for Unlit Lamps
Adjourned Meeting
ON Friday.
A stated meeting Of select and common
councils was held last evening.
Select Councils.
The following named members were
present:
Messrs. Barr, Doerr, Eberly, Franklin,
Judith, Zecher and Evans, president.
Various Reports.
Mr.. Zecher from tie finance committee
presented the report Of the city treasurer
and receiver of taxes, from which it ap-
peared that the last months receipts
amounted to sl2.O11.71 payments, So
490.60; balance in treasury March 1,
s7,9sS.O3.
Annual Report of the City Solicitor.
A long report of the city solicitor was
read:
To the Honorable the Select and Common Oou,,-
ellis oftie City Of Lancaster.
GENTLEMEN In pursuance of reSOlu-
tion of councils passed the 1st day of JAN
uary, 1879, herewith transmit to your
honorable body MY report as solicitor for
the term commencing April ). 1880, up to
ana including February %, 1881.
The work of the Office Of city solicitor
has been somewhat increased by reason of
the many suits brought against the city
on outstanding bills, and also by the diff
ticulty with the suspended city treasurer.
From the first Of these has arisen con-
siderable difficulty and some litigation.
All of these claims are on bills, ap-
proved by the street committee, for the
improvement of the streets during the
year 1879. Suits were brought by the
parties holding tho same in the court of
common pleas, and before several OF the
aldermen of the city, and in some of the
cases by direction of the finance commit
tee Judgment was entered against the city
with stay of proceedings until the 1st Of
June and 1st of August next. This will
give ample time for their payment out of
the next assessment.
The following are the judgments so
entered in the court of common pleas,
viz
P. S. McTague, VS.. city of Lancaster,
September term, 1880, No. 72. s46O52
John r. Smith ct al vs.. same, September
term, 1880, No. 46, 1903 65 Same VS..
same, September term, 1880, No. ~,
s229. 30. Same vs.. same, September term,
1880, No. 4S, S593.92. Same VS.. same,
September term. 1880, No. 40, 1857 81.
Same VS.. same, September term, 1880, No.
50. s42717. p. s. McTa.ue VS.. same, Oc-
tOber term, 1880, No. 2, $S46.15. f. II.
Kaufman VS.. same. October term, 1880,
No. 5, s433.Sa. David Millers use VS..
same, December term, 1880, No. 7, $685.
54
The suits before the aldermen of the
city were also Oh bills approved by the
street committee, and judgment was rem
dered for the amount Of such bills. In all
Of these cases ascertained that the bills
were correct. No effort has been made to
collect any of these judgments, except in
the case of George Weiman VS.. the city.
Execution was issued by tho alderman,
but the court on certiorari set aside tie
same at the costs Of the plaintiff.
The following arc the judgments en-
tered before the aldermen OF the city,
viz:
Before Alderman Barr Alexander Har-
ris' use, September 8 1880, s76.73; John
r. Seigler, September %, 8 judgments
aggregating $29.6 ; Joseph Forrest, sr.'s,
use, October 16, 1880, $1,000; Charles
Schwebcl, November Is, 1880, s1.S7;
Schwebel & Bolbach. November Is, 1880,
$50. .93 d. NJ. BrintOn & Co., November
1S. 1880, s1O6.32.
Before Alderman McConOmy: George
Weiman, August 10 1880. $500.
The suits remaining undetermined are E.
II. Kaulfman's use VS.. city, September
term, 1880, No. G3, s1,319.17; P. 8. Nc
Tague VS.. city, October term, 1880, No.
$500.
The last lHentioned suit by McTague is
claim for an extra compensation, and
should therefore be contested, 10 extra
work having been done.
A difficulty arose during the year be
tween the city and county concerning
the costs to be received by the mayor in
certain eases heard before him. Suit was
brought before Alderman Spurrier, and
judgment entered for the city, which judg-
ment was paid. The matter was finally
arranged by a case stated submitted to the
court and a decision thereon.
The case of Mary KissinScr VS.. the city
Of Lancaster, for damages by reason of
the death of her husband, caused by de
fective gutter at the corner of East Orange
street and Cherry alley, was tried in Sep
tember last, and a verdict was rendered
against the city for 81, 600. A writ Of er-
ror was taken to the supreme court and is
now pending.
In the cases of the city VS.. Pennsyl-
vania railroad company, the rulo taken by
the company's counsel to consolidate the
suits at the cost of the city, was argued
before the court, who, for convenience of
trial, consolidated the actions, but not ut
the cost of the city.
The trouble with the suspended city
$ro, l., l.
litigation, the facts of which arc well known
to councils. After the suspension Of Ed
ward Welchans from his office On an at
tempt being made by the finance commit
tee to take possession of the room, books,
papers, and other property Of the city, an
was obtained by him to prevent
any interference on the part of city officials
but the court, on 4 hearing, dissolved the
and possession was then given
to William S. Shirk, the person chosen to
act ~ treasurer during the suspension. A
large amount of money and some of the
books belonging to the city not being forth
coming, mandamus was prayed for, to
compel the said Edward Welchans to sur
render up the same, which, after hear
ing, was granted by the court. The money
to be in his hands and the books
were then surrendered. In pursuance of
resolution of your honorable body. have
brought suit for the balance found to be
due by him to the city by the special COM
mittee, who were instructed to investigate
his books. have also, in conjunction
with the special counsel Of the city, en-
tered up the judgment bond given for the
year 1880, by Edward Welchans and his
sureties, and have issued writ of scire
fdcias Oh the same.