Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1885-06-04
JObbery In Councils.

City councils distinguished themselves
last evening by two very conspicuous and
characteristic acts, both grossly violatiye
OF the spirit and letter of the laws which
councilmen swear to support and which
they perjure themselves by ignoring and
contemning.
s In one instance it was brought to the
notice of both branches that, after asking
for bids for city work, the committee
shamelessly ignored the lower bidder and
gave the contract to the higher bidder, for
no other reason than that he had the job
before when he bid for it at a lower price.
Nevertheless common council sustained
the committee and sanctioned the job. In
another case, involving a like principle, but
of far more serious concern to the city, its
ordinances and the law of the state were
repudiated, and flagrant violation of both
was committed.
When the $4,000 bill Of Jos. Huber came
up in councils before, Mr.. Riddle said he
did not believe the water committee had
any right to contract such debt without
being ordered so to do by councils; Coun-
Gilman Evans said the committee had
knowingly and deliberately violated the
law, and the city was not responsible for
y the debt they had incurred; he thought it
very singular that this unauthorized debt
should have been contracted without ask
;rc S,,,. S,,,S0Sals, without authority from
councils, and when AeEs t was no occasion
for it, as the new 5000, 900 'gsIiSn sHn pump
had been put in place and was ihss ihS.
working order the eINTELLIGENCER then
quoted and again points out that,
The act of March Is, 1885, sec. Getty Ordi.
nances, ed. OF 1880, page l39, sec. 6) says that
"the mayor, aldermen and citizens of the
city of Lancaster, in select and common
--coilncils assembled, shall not hare the pO,peT
s or dNth0yty to erect, construct or make any
public improvements for tho benefit of the
said city, where the expenditures thereof ,vii
exceed The sum Of three hundred dollars un
1ess the erection, construction or making o.
the said public improvements is first author
ized by an ordinance passed for that purpose
&c. !" unless the same be paid out of the reg
ular annual appropriations.
The extraordinary improvements for which
this bill of Huber is presented were not
Z made in accordance with the law, nor are
they provided for by either special ordinance
II 4 tho regular annual appropriation. They
ire exactly of the kind that tho law contem
lates shall be made only by express direc
lion OF councils, and after bids have been in
yited, specifications made and contracts
awarded. No claim against the city for such
an amount of work done by direction of the
water committee or at the instance of the
superintendent of water works without the
authority of an ordinance and bids asked
can be valid.
Moreover. the act of 1874, governing and
regulating the cities of the state, expressly
declares that "all work required by the
city shall be performed under contract te
he given to the lowest responsible bidder.
In justification of the vote by which
councils last evening agreed to pay this il
legal bill it viii be said they had an opinion
from the city solicitor approving it. II
needs only an inspection of that opinion tC
see that it was drawn for the purpose OF
helping Huber TO get his money; and that
it dodges and evades all the facts of tn,
case, which show the utter illegality of this
claim.
The citizens of Lancaster viii not be sur
prised 70 read any sort Of an opinion that