Daily Republican. [volume] ([Wilmington, Del.]) 1874-1890, 1885-11-13

Taylor raised the point that Mr.. earn
hill was not voting on the q aestion, but
only moving that the bills be paid.
Mr.. Murray objected to paying the
bill, and discussion ensued, during
which Mr.. Bsrnhill asked him II he
wanted the committee to do the same
As was done when he was chairman Of
the omnittee, and held back the dog.
catcher's money for six months, until
It was over S40c, which the present
committee had to pay. This seemed to
satisfy Mr.. Murray, and he did not
offer any further objection.
A vote was then taken and the bill
was passed, and an order drawn for the
amount.
The Sewer Committee, to whom WAS
referred the petition of Allen Speak
man to tap ths sewer Of Delaware
avenue and Franklin street, reported
that they had granted him permission.
The sand lot question was then taken
up, and the clerk read the report of the
Building Inspector and Street Com
missioner on tho quantity and quality
of the sand in the different lots, AZ fol-
lows: Robinson Il Co.'S lot at Twenty.
fourth and Tstnall street contains about
8, $50 yards of sand ;thef3arr lot, aJioin-
ing, about ,+45 yards, making a total
Ia the two lots recommended by the
committee of :, 1855 cubic yards; Isaac s.
Elliott's lot at Washington street and
Elliott avenue, about I7,1l1 cubic
yards.
Mr.. Hawkins presented comm uni.
cation from William G. Pierce, Offering
to sell lot at Twenty fourth and Tat
nall streets, 3Sx125 feet, at SIC foot, oil
1913 for the lot. Also one from Isaac B.
Elliott, offering to sell the lot at Eli ott
avenue and Washington street for
81 700.
Mr. Baynard presented a communt
cation from John g. Baker, offering tc
furnish sand from his lot for six
months, and IL at the end of that time
the Street Commissioner, Building In
bpector and Chief Engineer of the Sur
veying Department shall say that 1t IL
| not tit for use, he will not make any
charge for 1t.
MI. Farrell said that when the com
mittee made its report he was very
much in favor of it, as he believed and
still believes, that they acted for tn,
best under the circumstances. Bu,
1 now the question has assumed another
phase ana q lot Ia offered, " hich accord
ing to the report Of the officials, con
tnins twice as much sand as the two lott
recommended by the cemmittes, anC
for considerable less money, and b,
thought 1t would be well to refer th'
entire matter heck to the committee.
| Mr.. Blake said he did not think 4
worth while 10 fool any more tim,
about the Baker lot, as the sand is no
good. He knew Of some parties WIN
were using this so-called sand to re-se
curb, when rain came up and the,
were obliged to quit work when the,
again commenced they could not use II
as 1t was like mud, and they had to ge
sand from the city to finish the job.
Mr.. Newoll impaired if there was no
la atreet marked, TO be cut through til
Elliott lot, and asked the Building In
lspcctor for the Information.
i Upon the Building inspector bein
given permission TO speak, he sal
there was e street markel through tha
lot, and IN answer to Mr., Farrell sal
the sand on IL was of vsry good qua
ity, and better than that ON the Robin
son lot.
Mr. r.. H. Taylor said that h
was getting very tired and sick of thi
entiro matter. Tho joint committee o
the purchase Of a sand lot had give
tion before presenting their report, an
as Council does not seem to have an
Icon opiidenoe in the committee, he offere
an amendment, that the whole matte
be referred to the Building Inspecto
and Street Commissioner.
| Mr. Farrell said he would accept I'll
amendment. Mr.. Bau2h Thought tt
Robinson lot WAS the cheapest, as
could be sold at u good price for bull,
ing lots, after the sand is taken ou
when Mr.. Farrell remarked that
Council WAS buying property for built
ing lots he had no more to say, but
had thought all along that 1t was
n sand lot that WAS wanted.
Mr. Merris lay LOT was opposed to r,
ferrinR the matter TO the officials, {
Council WAS responsible In this ma
ter, and would have to bear the brun
; He considered the Robinson lot Il
= cheapest, as the sand is of bett
I ylQuality than i'll the other lots, al
although he did not favor Council en- te
ing into speculation in building lot.
{ still 1t was well TO look out for Il
+ future, and buy lot which, after Il
sand was exhausted, would bring IL
best returns, aud this no was statistic
could be best accomplished by takir
! the lots recommended by the CON
mittee. Ho thought the matter ha
been before Council about long enoug
! and he wanted it settled without furth
delay.
II Mr.. Farrell urged the merits of tt
Elliott lot, hich he said was large
, contained more sand, could be boug
for nearly two thousand dollars le
than the Robinson lot, and as 1t ",
located on the first avenue in the Min
3 ward would bring As much, or perhal
more money for building lots than Il
iother. He thought Mr.. Elliott's of
should be accepted at once, and II
r WAS not, he considered him O very foo
{ ish man II he did not double the pric
II Mr.. Mention called attention to th
} fact that there ie stable on this lot, q
q line with the street rs laid out ON Il
1 city plan, and that If Council did n
lbuy the lot, and the street was opene
t lagos He thought this view OF IL
t matter deserved some attention, and /
Y moved that the matter be referred
= the joint committee, with instruction
/ to have plan made of the lot, 30 thi
iOouncil could have full understandir
{ Sof the matter.
Mr.. X. FL. Taylor said that there ha
lbeen suspicion thrown on the action
A the committee by Mr.. Murray, and al
2 by the press Of this city. de rsferr,
s fespecinlly to an article which recent
D appeared in the Sunday Star, refiecti,
lon the committee, aud inferring tn
] the members had some interest In ha
, ing the Robinson lot accepted. VIII,
! tho matter wan before Council tv
9 weeks ago, Mr.. Murray had mad
} charges against tire committee, an
. when the speaker asked him II he 7
{ ferred to him, he replied that he d
I lnat At that MI