Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-07-31
PARKS AND CITYHALL
OPINION OF CITY ATTORNEY As 10 Re
M0vAL OF PARK-KEEPERs.
Committee on Grounds and Buildings
Discuss New city-Hall
Plans, &C., &c.

The City Council Committee on
Grounds and Buildings met at 1880 !.
III. yesterday in the City Engineers
Office. Present Messrs. Kendler llu
the chair, Ammons, and Snead.
At q previous meeting Mr.. Kendler
moved that the Committee reconsider
the vote by which it had reelected the
old park.keepers. The legality of this
being doubted, the opinion Of the City
Attorney was asked, and last night his
opinion was submitted-as follows:
To the Committee on Grounds and Bg'td-
ings:
Gentlemen,-In reply to your inquiry
whether you have the right to recon-
sider your action in electiDg certain
employees tpark-keepers, &c.,l which
were elected by you at your meeting
held July l3, 1886, submit the fol-
lowing opinion
On the 18th Of July, 1866, your com
mit;ee went into the election or ap-
pointment Of keepers Of the parks and
other Similar officers. The officers you
elected were the parties already filing
those positions, and since their election
have continued 70 perform the duties Of
their respective positions.
III by your inquiry you wish to know
whether you can yitiste or nullity such
election by reconsidering your former
action, an OF opinion that you cannot.
An election is not like an ordinance or
resolution to be overcome By recon
sideration. A party once elected can
only be gotten at by removal. As was
said by the Supreme Court of Missis
sippi in Thomas eS. Burns, ,23 Miss.
557,) " Indeed, il seems so clear upon
principle that authority is not needed
to sustain the proposition that where
the power given to appoint an officer
mas been exercised any subsequent
appointment must be void, unless the
prior incumbent hes been legally re-
moved and the Office become vacant"
The power to remove "all officers "
is lodged in The Council by section 2S.
chapter 4, Of the city charter. The
power having been lodged in the Coun-
Gil, it must be exercised by the Council.
Wilcox, in his work on Corporations.
at section go, says: I" If the power OF
removing any officer be not expressly
corfded to particular person or class.
it is incidental 70 the corporation at
large, and not to the person or class in
whom the right Of appointment or elect
ing such officer is vested"
In the later work OF Dillon on NUM-
cipsl Corporations the author, in sec.
ton 24l, Volume l., recognizes the same
principle in the following language
But the power 10 remove, like every
other incidental power, is incident to
the corporation, and not to sny selec.
body or particular part Of it, and unless
delegated to a select body or part Of j.
must be exercised by the whole corpo-
ration, and at a corporate assembly
regularly and duly convened.
But even if the Council could and hal
delegated to your committee the power
to remove, yet the Council mas not
given you the power to remove at yoar
pleasure. Not having any such power,
you cannot, without cause and notice
given TO the officer, remove. See e.
sGrte Willard 1, Ri. G.. 595, 5gj.
lam Of opinion that the passage by
you Of any resolution TO reconsider
your action in electing the said officers
would be Of no avail.
ISignedl c. Y. MEREDITH,
July 90, 1886. City Attorney.
Mr.. Ammons moved that the opinion
be referred 10 the Council, With re-
quest that the Council remove the Of
fcers, the power 10 do so being vested
in tha, body.
Agreed 70.
CITY HALL.
In reference to the City-Hall ques-
ton Mr.. Ammops said that lie thought
the committee ought to decide what
plan il would adopt. He believed the
Council ought 70 know at its meeting
on Monday night what was the
committees decision. lie Therefore
proposed to take up the resolution
passed by the Board Of Aldermen,
which asked that the committee, with
III. assistance Of the City Engineer, be
instructed to report immediately to that
body what steps should be taken to iu-
sure the speedy commencement Of
building the new City Hall, and
that It's views bs given IN full
as to the plans and the best
mode Of employing men upon the
work as fsr as the same is practicable.
He then read paper which he had
prepared and which he moved be
adopted as an answer to the resolution.
The paper is as follows
10 he Honorable Board Of Aldermen:
Gentl.men.-Th Committee on
Grounds and Buildings in answer to
resolution Of your honorable body,
would say
First. That we intend, with the as
sistance of the City Engineer, to pro-
ceed at once 10 build the City Hall by
the Wait Cutter plan adopted and
paid for by the city Of Richmond.
Second. That We intend to make sn
honest effort to build itby day-labor, as
far as the same is practicable, under the
direction Of the City Engineer and acom-
petent supervising architect or superin-
tendent Of construction, TO be chosen
by the Committee, who shall be paid
a-per month for his services.
Third. That such work as cannot be
done by our Virginia firms we intend to
purchase from some establishment be-
yond the limits OF the State upon the
best terms that can be had, subject TO
the approval Of the City Engineer and
Committee.
Fourth. We believe that the stOne-
word, brickwork, plsstering, painting,
plumbing, &C., can be done on the
ground, and that the steam-boilers and
heating apparatus can be built by one
Of our Richmond builders.
Fifth. That the wood and IRON
work and galvanized-iron-work can be
done on the folio wing plan-yiz. Get