Los Angeles herald., 1891-11-17
SLUGGER HAZARD.
That's What Councilman Rees
Called the Mayor.
His Honor Accused of Hitting
Below the Belt.
The Proceedings at the Coun Gil Meet
ing Yesterday.
Mr. Rces Makes a Hard Attack on the
Mayor street sprinkiing Bids.
Reports of Committees and
Omcers-Other Items.

OmO0Eo-OsAACa 1eo.Ac.
The usual session of the co uncil took
place yesterday. After the reading of
the minutes, the first business was a
message from the mayor. His honor
returned the street superintendent's
ordinance about tearing up the streets
for amendment. The vote was reconsid-
cred, and after the eighth paragraph
had been amended by striking out the
word graded which interfered with
the sense of the ordinance, the latter
was again passed.
MR.. REEs ON THE MAYOR.
The mayors veto of Geo. A. McLain g
bill of 1926 for work on Temple street,
action on which had been continued
from last week, was next taken up. The
re-reading was dispensed with, and
Councilman Rees at once arose to an
nounce that during the week he had
carefully investigated the merits OF the
case, and had found that the mayor had
made number of mistakes. Mr.. Rees
spoke substantially as follows:
Since the last meeting of the Council
have carefully examined the message
of Mayor Hazard, which was read to us
last Monday, and must admit if the
statements contained therein were true
the members of this body should hang
their heads in shame. If we do not at
tempt to refute his assertions it would
be equivalent to admitting their truth.
I therefore ask your indulgence for few
minutes while / endeavor to disprove
his honor's statements.
desire to comment briefly upon the
message of the mayor in which he We
toed the demand of George A. McLain
for 1926 for work done on Temple street;
and as his honor, in his conversations
relating to the subject OF this message,
has seen fit to refer to other matters not
connected with it, may take the same
license and stray little from the point
at issue. The mayor never wears so
broad smile as when he is engaged in
one OF these encounters, which affords
him an opportunity to display his
prowess and the councils indiscretions.
am convinced that his honor loves a
fight, but he adopts the methods of
mayors statements respecting the ac-
biOu VI biC COuhCiit bOkObhOi Wibhi
his purported remarks, printed
in the HERALD, are violent
distortion OF the facts. Every sem
'tence of his message is prepared with a
Machiavelian cunning 80 as to lead the
public to believe that this council or
-dered the work in question to be done
without any effort on it's part to comply
with the requirements of the charter.
Now what are the facts in the case?
Some time ago five members OF the
council went out to the western end OF
Temple street to examine bridge
which had just been completed under
contract with the city. On this occas-
ion our attention was called to the dan
gerous condition OF portion OF Temple
street. Every member could see at
glance that life and property were ieop-
ardized by the unsafe condition OF the
road and it was conceded by all mem
bers present that it was judicious pol
icy for the city authorities to assist
when necessary in placing thoroughfares
leading into the city in safe and pas
sable condition. 1t was thought at the
time that it would probably cost 5000 to
widen the roadway ten feet. A short
time after written proposition was
made by parties, whose teams were un-
employed, to do this work for 1896. On
receiving this proposition the board OF
public works made the following report,
which l have copied from the records OF
the council proceedings, at its meeting
of October 6, 1897
"Some time ago the attention of the
board of public works was called to the
condition of Temple street, near its
western terminus, at which point the
said street is so narrow that wagons
cannot pass a street car without incur
ring the danger of sliding down the en-
bankment. Parties interested in the
Improvement of this street have sub
mitted an offer to widen said street,
where it ie dangerously narrow, and be-
lieying that this is public necessity,
your board of public works beg to rec
ommend that the work be done and a
contract drawn with the party in ac-
cordance with the proposition submit
ted herewith. We recommend that
proyiso be inserted in the contract, if
entered into, for the extending of the
storm drain pipe not less than three feet
beyond the new fill," which report was
adopted on motion of Mr.. Innes, and the
city attorney instructed to draft the
necessary contract. This action of the
council is of record, and shows that this
council aimed to carry out the strict let
ter of the law. The contractor called at
the city attorneys Office to sign the
contract, when he was told that requi-
sition was all that was needed, and that
no contract was necessary, because the
sum involved was less than $500. AS
the council had virtually contracted
with him, the contractor proceeded with
and completed the work in accordance
with his offer and the proviso regarding
the drain pipe, and presented
his demand for 1926 to the
finance committee. AS no requisition
accompanied the demand, inquiry was
made concerning the contract, when it
was discovered that none had been
drawn, Notwithstanding the instruc-
tions of the council. The work was
done, and the man was entitled to his
money. Two members of the board OF
public works being present with the
finance committee, they signed arequisi-
tion to have the work done, and thus
cure defect which had arisen in the
proceedings. This requisition and the
demand were approved at the meeting
of the council November 2, 1891, by a
vote OF nine ayes. Now, 1 ask any can
IL II Il L.