The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1891-12-29
The LAST SESSION in 81.
The Common Council Hears From
the City Property Committee.
Mr.. BATCHELDER'S STATEMENT
Remarks by Various Members Who Told
what Ih,y Thought of the Report
and Resolution as 1t stood-Referred
To the Ordinance Committee.

The Common Council of 1891 met last
evening for the last time. President
Watson was In the chair. The report OF
the special committee on investigating
the committee on city property, with the
accompanying resolution, that the ordi-
ance committee report ordinances regu-
lating contracts and establishing an as
sistant superintendent of public build
ings, which was made the special order
for this meeting was taken from the ta-
BILE. Mr.. Mclaughlin moved the adoption
of the resolution in concurrence with the
board Of aldermen.
Mr. Batcheldor rose and said he
thanked the council for giving the com
mittee fair play in laying the resolution
over till this meeting, as il it had not been
done many members of the council would
have voted on what they practically knew
nothing about, but now each had had a
chance to look into the matter for him.
self. Till that report was presented the
committee did not really know of what
they were accused and not till this meeting
did they have an opportunity OF defend
ing themselves. The report of the COM
mittee of investigation acquitted the
city property committee OF any serious
charge but at the same time did
not exhonerate them, but found them
guilty of violating the letter of the city
ordinances. The principal charges brought
against them were, first, arbitrary con-
duct toward other members OF the city
council. The Wickenden Street Fire sta
tion was mentioned and Mr.. Batchelder
said the improvements they were ordered
to make were. not such that there was
need for any hurry as the improvements
were more to beautify the station than
anything else, and other work had been
ordered done which was all done in order
a r. nata 1ar gatd thsa
records of the committee were not locked
up as had been charged during the lnvesti-
CATION, but had been open to the investi-
eating committee, and read communica-
ton from the city solicitor corroborating
his statement.
contracts, Mr.. Batchelder said there had
been none shown, as in each case the con-
tracts had been awarded TO the lowest
bidder, and cited the Academy Avenue
School House and the Manual Training
School, also the Smead system of heating,
which,thelsuperintend OF schools and the
superintendent of health advocated. so
that the committee could not do otherwise
than use it.
The third charge is that in awarding con-
tracts for school furniture no bids were
advertised for. There was no provision
compelling the committee to advertise for
bids and the first time the local company
the first time the committee on city prop
erty knew they manufactured school
furniture.
In answer to the fourth charge. that
members of the committee on city property
had derived personal gain from contracts,
Mr.. Batchelder said that when such work
had been done by them it was at no loss
to the city, and they had charged no
more to the city in any line of business
than any one else would have done or
than they would have charged any one
else. The members had not done this
work for personal gain but that the best
interests OF the city might be served.
The fifth change in that certain architec-
tural work was performed by firm one
of whose members is member of the city
government, and also that extra fees have
been charged for supervision since this
committee came into Office. This firm has
not had a very large proportion of the
work but as they did their work well and
at reasonable prices they have had con-
siderable and If no supervisor had been
paid the superintendent OF public build
ings would have had more work than he
could possibly attend to and IL would have
been necessary to engage an architect at
large salary To assist him.
The superintendent of public buildings
had not neglected his work, as was
charged, but had attempted To perform
more work than IL was possible for one
man to do and IL is an absolute necessity
for him TO have an assistant of some kind.
Mr. Bachelor in refuting these charges,
said he hoped the council would not adopt
this resolution and report, which ac-
quilted and yet did not eXonerate, the
members of the city property committee,
even though the Board of Aldermen had
done so.
Mr. Angel said he thought the report
and resolution were entirely independent,
and that the resolution read rather
strangely, in that IL ordered the ordinance
committee To report certain ordinances
which he did not think the council should
pass without due thought. There was no
doubt the superintendent of public build
ings needed some one TO assist him, but IL
he was to be an architect he should have
charge of building and not be AN assistant.
The committee on ordinances should have
a chance TO look at all sides of the ques-
tion, and he did not think the council
should order them to report an ordinance
till they had done so. He then moved TO
refex the resolution and the report TO the
committee on ordinances
Mr.. McCanghin said that rs n member
Of the investigating committee. he felt il
his duty to defend their action; they had
exonerated the city property committee
from intentional mismanagement, but as
several instances OF favoritism had been
proved as well as other charges. he
thought the Council would do wrong 20
send the resolution 90 the COMMITTEES on
ordinances that practically would kill the
whole thing.
Mr.. Read made few remarks DENYING
the charges OF favoritism and refuting the
statements OF Mr.. Mclaughlin.
continued On Page 1.l