Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-04-18
CITY COUNCIL.


The CITY council met YESTERDAY IA
moon, Mayor Smith in the clla, H Nn
,'u Aldermen Flanagan, an
drews, Askew, Hughes, A'oii"se'
Adams and Alexander ,n,;,tea
The annual report of the conili,,''se
nm fire department, publisheo in
Wednesdays GAZETTE, was Ft"u' IL
ceived and filed. ....o;,+ed nj
The special committee appoiu.eu 81
n recent meeting submitted inc i9i'
'o"'"s W FORT WORTH, Ten J
April II, 1854.
10 ,l,e Hon. Mayor aud Board OF Aldermen
of The I'iiy of Fort Worth ,,,it.
GENTLEMEN:-Gou special co'liiiiit'
fee TO whom was referred the peIit,ot.
of p. II. Hennessy, complaining 'i" o
Injustice had been done nm anu wy
Fire EXtinguisher Mahulac'uI'TIs
Company of Chicago, llir oy ~,
Asliew, by sending n telegram IN ms ms
official capacity AS chairman on 'ite
fire committee of Fort Worth, rehect-
inc ON work furnished said city oy
said company and praising up Work
furnished by their competitors, ires.
ton & Co, would respectfully report
that we find the following telegram
under date March 2i, 1851, -. Is As
kew Answer at once which OF the
hose carriages just bought you prefer.
lake Keller, foreman No. 3, and an
swered under date of March -, lSSi,
as follows: Jake Keller, foreman
No. 3, Houston We prefer r. 81
Preston & Co.'s hose carriage all the
time. j. b. Askew, chairman COM
mite, fire department. IN our
opinion, Alderman Askew was not
justified in answering said telegram IN
his official capacity, as it was clearly
proven that he had never consulted
the committee, as said telegram pur-
ported to represent. And we regret
exceedingly that the city OF Fort
Worth, through his fundamentally
was made to appear as party pre-
noting the private business of one per
son to the injury of another. The re
manning portion of the report con
tanned comparison of the relative
merits of the hose-carriages, and eX
presses n conclusion opposite to the
preference of Alderman Askew
| The report was signed by Aldermen
Andrews and Aldridge of the com
mittee.
Alderman Askew said he was not {
hcse-carriage, and he therefore asked
that the report in reference to the car
riage should be separated from that re
ferring to him.
Alderman Andrews said he did no
see what Alderman Askew was driv
ing at. and saw no reason why Their
should be any separation. The com
mittee had reported as they found.
Alderman Askew said his persona
character and standing was involved
and he had no defense to make of an.
hose-carriage.
Alderman Aldridge explained tina
Mr.. Helnessy had asked a decision a
to the merits of the carriage, and there
fore experts were appointed. Alder
man Askew could answer the frs
point if he chose.
Alderman Andrews said the telt
gram sent to Alderman Askew We
addressed to him as an individu;
while his answer was signed cfliciall.
A motion being made to receive I'll
report, Alderman Askew submitte
the following, which was read:
To the Honorable Mayor and City Counc
Fort Worth, Tex:
GENTLEMEN--We would ask tn
, the report of the special committee a
pointed by His Honor j. p. Smith
4 investigate the charges preferrt
F., against me by p. II. Hennessy, be +
e jected for the following reasons:
4 /. For the reason that said col
. mittee has failed to investigate al
I make any report whatever to this cou
!. ell, of large portion of the subje
n matter contained in said charges.
: .. For the reason that the
vestigation was conducted contrary
law, and in direct opposition to Il
time-honored and well-known prir
,e pie of common law that every n
a should be held "innocent until he
W been proven guilty."
b. 3. We ask the council to reject
Ill rep Jrt of said committee for the reas
of that there never has been to my kno
ut edge one iota of evidence introdu
be by the party preferring said charg
looking to the proof of the same.
A. We ask that all of said char
be dismissed and the report of s
committee be rejected for the rea:
that none of said charges have {
We been sworn to, verified or affirmed
Die for the further reason that we h
I'M never been permitted to meet
lea complainant before the said commi
ry, to interrogate or question him conc
M ing the truth or falsity OF any one o
9TH of said charges.
his 5. We ask the council to reject
Pc report of said committee for the fur
reason that not one single CHI
has ever been proven according to
i. rules governing any known tribu
s,io @. We ask the council to reject
'ta report of said committee, for the
iue son that the language and meanir
w two certain kilograms, one rece
'hss and the other sent by me, and
low nished the committee by myself,
out upon which said committee claim
tx. base a great portion of its report,
ii'h been misinterpreted and an Vi
construction placed upon the sam
,AE said committee.
z. And finally that said charge
dismissed, and the report of said
tise- mittee be not received, for the re
way that there Is not now, nor was the
ay's any time, any foundation in fact
d to truth on which to base said cha
It OF We ask further that this paper be
auti- with this council.
the Yours Respectfully,
nest j. B. AsKEW
and Chm'n Com. Fire De
hose Alderman Andrews said the
dust ment was very extraordinary.
land committee did not claim to hav,
.citic lowed regular legal rules. Aide
Mr.. Askew was present and quest
., at the witnesses. He went out an,