The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1890-07-27
FROM THE FINANCE COMMITTEE
TO the Editor Of the Eagle.

TO the Editor Of the Eagle
In view of the recent action of the city
council on the bond question now before
that body, and the adverse criticisms in
dulged therein as TO the position taken by
I the finance committee, in the premises, we.
| the members of that committee, desire TO
/ briefly explain our reasons for the course
/ pursued by Us in the matter:
/ On the 9th of May, the city sold to "
W. Levy, Esq, the bonds TO be issued in
I payment of the several contracts for street
and ally paving, then in course OF construc-
[ ton, there being four separate and distinct
+ contracts in all
| BY reason of unforeseen delays the city
was not ready for delivering the bonds
until about July II, when objections were
raised, by the attorney of the purchaser,
I to the form Of the bond, and manner of is
sue, be suggesting the changes desired. Mr.
/ Levy expressed his readiness TO accept the
bonds, il his attorney advised that he could
safely do so.
Upon being informed of Mr.. Levy's &C
ton the council instructed the finance
committee TO ascertain within the next
twenty-four hours whether or not Mr..
Levy intended to take the bonds, and If
not TO arrange for their disposal 70 other
parties
The committee informed Mr. Levy of the
instructions of the council, and he reiter
ated his willingness TO accept the bonds If
so advised by his attorneys, who were then
engaged in examining the steps taken by
the council leading up to the issue OF the
bonds. The committee made no effort TO
dispose of them elsewhere as serious defects
had now been discovered and the commit
tee did not feel warranted in trying TO dis
pose Of a bond which appeared to be tainted
n form, and besides they believed
that the objections could be overcome by
proper action of the council, and that good
faith required that the city should offer the
purchaser legally issued bond before
undertaking TO cancel its contract with
him.
The objections urged against the validity
of the bonds are in substance as follows:
First-That the bonds issued were IN ex-
cess of the total cost OF the several con
tracts.
Second-That the ordinance authorizing
the issue was defective, in that by typo
graphical error the issue for one year 1885
was entirely omitted, while two years IS
sue was authorized for 1897. Also, that
the date of publication which the law spe-
officially requires should De placediu brack-
cts at the top of the ordinance, had been
omitted.
Third-That on some Of the contracts the
bonds were issued before the expiration of
the thirty udyo GIlnc Ieti 4lICA 10 bc SAFcu
to property owners before the issue Is
made
Fourth-That a separate issue of bonds
should be made for each contract, so that
if the proceedings under one contract was
irregular, only the bonds issued there
under would be affected. On the present
case one issue was made to cover all the
contracts, with nothing to indicate to
which contract any particular bond be-
longed
At the council meeting Friday night
Messrs. Kos Harris and John f. Hume
representing Mr.. Levy-submirted an
ordinance and form of bond, which they
desired the council to adopt, but the cOun-
Gil declined TO consider them, thereby
affirming their intention to compel Mr..
Levy to accept the bonds-in spite of the
alleged defects. At the same time, they
relieved the finance comm 'ttee of further
effort in the matter by appointing special
committee TO sell them. The first three OBJ |
jectiOns are shown to exist by the records /
of the city. OF their merits, the commit /
tee does not assume to judge. We do not I
furnish the legal talent for the city, pre-
pare its ordinances, or decide on the form /
of bonds to be issued The legal defects /
did not originate with Us, nor are we in /
any wise responsible for them. We be /
leye that justice and fair dealing should I
govern the acts of a municipality, the I
same as those of an individual, and that /
{ he action of the council in its effort to /
repudiate its honest obligations, viii bring /
discredit upon the city and upon the |
originators of the scheme.
GEO. P GLAZE.
CHAS MOsBACHER,
W. q. MCKEE
Finance committee. /