Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1885-06-13

j as was agreed upon by the Common
Council.
On motion Of Mr.. Frischkorn, the
amendment of the Beard was unani-
mously agreed to.
THE STREET CARTS.
| The rules were Suspended, and Mr..
Ammons arose to ask why it was that
the street carts were engaged in grading
and levelling private lot at the Jewish
cemetery.
Mr.. Campbell explained that several
years ago the city sold the Hebrews
lot with the understanding that the
city should have the right to remove
gravel from the lot. A wash had oc-
CURED and the committee had thought
it matter of equity to repair the wash
ed places.
Mr.. Ammons claimed that the matter
needed investigation.
There was no resolution before the
Council and the matter ended here.
SENDING FOR MEMBERS.
Mr.. Turpin thought it took two
| thirds vote to transfer the amount need
ed for school improvements from one
fund to another. On his motion the
Sergeant-at- Arms was instructed to go
out and bring in legitimate quorum.
After awhile the Sergeant returned,
and Messrs. Hargrove, Cutchins, and
Bahen answered to their names. Mr..
Griffith, who was present at first, was
not in his seat, and the Council still
| found itself without the necessary quo
rum.
When Mr.. Griffith came in Mr..
Jones moved a reconsideration of the
vote on the school question, and it was
agreed to and then the amendment was
passed.
Mr.. Bowie, changing his vote from
"NO" to AYE" explained that he
believed that he was inconsistent, but
that he wanted to see the work of i'm
proyement of the schools expedited,
and was willing to make concessions on
this account.
ELECTRIC LIGHT.
Mr.. Bowie moved that the report of
the special Committee on Electric Light
be taken up, and this being agreed to the
report was read as follows:
The committee appointed to consider
the question Of electric light have per-
formed the duty assigned them in ac-
cordance with the instructions as con-
tanned in the following resolutions, the
first four approved by the Mayor May
7, 1885, and the other adopted by the
Common Council May a, 1885:
Whereas there is reason TO believe
that some part of the public streets can
he lighted with arc lights at a cost not
exceeding the cost Of gas, and with
much better light, therefore be it
ReSolred by the City Council tthe
Common Council cOncurring), lst, That
a joint committee Of five be appointed,
two from the Board of Aldermen and
three from the Common Council, to be
styled the Committee on Electric Light.
Cd. That said committee be instruct
ed to advertise for proposals for fur
nishing the city with fifty arc lights, to
be located on the public streets as fol-
lows On Broad from Elba to Ninth,
down Ninth to Main, and on Main from
Belyidere to Twenty-fifth.
Sd. The advertisement to set forth
that the cost of all buildings, ma
chinery, lamp-posts, wires, and ma
terial and labor of every description Of
the electric plant, shall be borne by the
contractor; the candle-power of the
light and the hours Of service to be
stated the bids to be for round sum
per annum, and the price to continue
for three years; the contractor to have
the privilege of supplying electric light
to private consumers on such conditions
as to the occupation of the streets as
may be approved by the City Engineer.
The material and location of the posts,
the quality of the wire and candle
power of the lights to be such as the
said committee, with the advice Of the
City Engineer, may prescribe, with
such other conditions as to the said
committee may seem proper.
4th. The said committee is instructed
to report all bids received to the Coun-
Gil, together with a draft Of such an
ordinance as they will recommend.
ResOlred, That the Committee on
Electric Light be, and they are hereby,
instructed to report to either branch of
the City Council the annual costs Of
maintaining one hundred or more arc
electric lights for period Of five years,
with plan for their location on the
public streets.
In response to our advertisement
were the following bids
Schuyler Company, Of Hartford,
Conn.--0ne hundred lights, sl05.S4
per annum, being sS.S2 per month;
private consumers, sl2 per month per
light.
Thomson-Houston Company-Fifty
lights, sl20 per light per year, $40
per month; private consumers, if the
city uses so lights, sl5 per month per
light. One hundred lights, sl0S per
light per year, 81 per month per light;
private consumers, if the city takes
100, GA per month per light.
Your committee would recommend
that the city take 100 lights, the con-
tract to be for term Of five years, and
that an appropriation of $4,000 be made
TO defray the expense of the same for
the balance Of the present fiscal year.
As the difference in the two bids is so
very small, and the committee being
desirous that the city should get the
best light, they recommend that the
choice Of the company be left with them
in order that they may examine into the
relative merits Of the light furnished by
the competing companies.
If the proposition Of the committee
is approved the lights would be placed
along the following streets and in the |
various parks Of the city and the Capt.
n q