The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1892-05-27

Mrs. D. Wegman. s!25; E. j. Woodcork,
s. 50; ]. c. Supply Co., $495. s456. SO.
Sl5s. IA; James Palmer. Agent. SIS. SIT. so,
$3.50; james Mcdonald. s93 10. $50. rs,
S54 80, $21. 90. P. Z. Martin. $l61, SIG, SS5:
Hugo Mootz. s2s 60; Michael Farley,
$25. 70.
Also on payrolls Water Registrar. ETC.,
So. 06S. 81: laborers on meters. $613. SO; re-
assessors, 5000; all May, 1892
Received and referred TO their appro-
pirate committees.
REPORTS OF STANDING COMMITTEES.
The Committee on Streets, sewer II
Lighling reported on certificates of the
$500 on account of contract No. 562.
Mich. Curley $137. 40. retained percent
age on contract No. 627
Henry Byrne s1S65 20, on account of
contract No. 634 and on claims Of f. j.
Woodcock. S.; John Drain, S3l2; j. c.
s120; James Hunt. $40; Jas. Tumulty,
$120; Daniel Smith. $TS as correct.
Six (6) petitions for signs, etc, favorable.
The report was accepted.
The same committee also presented the
following:
JERSEY CITY. May 90, 1892.
The Honorable the Board Of Street and
Water Commissioners.
COMMUNICATIONS Committee on
Streets, Sewers and Lighting, to whom
was referred the objection OF His Honor
the Mayor to II certain pay roll Of labor
ers on npaved streets for the month OF
April, 1892, amounting in the aggregate
to 1854, would respectfully report as fol-
lows:
The sole objection returned is based on
the fact that these laborers were not ap-
pointed by resolution of the Board. and it
must be admitted that they were not so
appointed. Your committee finds. how
800 tI.N 1911 rr rl.NN fw@t. III,
date of the incorporation OF Jersey City
1t has been the custom to so appoint EN-
ployesrto the minor positions. 1t was so
done by the Board of Aldermen when the
power of employment was vested in that
body. The custom was continued by the
original Board of Public Works, was so
handed down through their various sue
cessorS and has in a measure been con-
ttuued by the present Board. We find
that at various times II possible improve
ment or this system has suggested itself
10 some of the members of new incoming
Boards ana efforts were made to lave ap-
pointments of every nature fixed by reso-
luton.
Rules setting forth that all appoint
ments to office should be by ballot or res
olution were often adopted md We be-
lieve that such q rule has been adopted
by this Board. 1t Is difficult. however,
to decide where the line shall be drawn
DPUWeen M dp Olutuieut W OIlCe, uhu uu
engagement to perform certain duties.
The duration of certain employments is
limited, and 1t has been the custom to ap-
point by committee for limited employ
ment only.
Rules are made to govern the majority
of cases, but there are exceptions TO all
rules; was this not allowable and should
we be held to a strict enforcement in ali
cases? Let us submit the following as "a
fair example of what might lie expected.
Resolved, That by and with the con-
curreuce of the Board of Finance, Jane
Doe and Mary Ann Roe, bs and are here
by appointed for Il term OF three days TO
scrub out the office at Pipe Yard, ut IL sal
cry of 81. so per day EACH. Then after the
Board of Finance had gravely examined
into the matter and found that the APP
pointees were physically capable of per-
forming the service, and that the salary
was not excessive they would concur,
subject to the approval of the Mayor, and
when he approved. u not until he did
could Jane and Mary Ann sally forth rs
full Pledged signed sealed and stamped
corporate employees to labor for their $3.50
per diem.
This may sound ridiculous, but it is
Just such IA case as might actually occur.
1t may be claimed that sworn bills could
be submitted In these cases. So they
could, but contemplating a strict enforce
ment OF the rule u resolution must also
be passed, for do not the inspectors GU
improvements present sworn bills for SER
vice rendered, u 1t is not hell that their
employment must be further supple