Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1892-07-28

An important meeting of citizens was
held at the Builders Exchange yester-
day week with the object in view
Of ascertaining whether the law under
which the Street and Sewer Department
collects its assessments for entering
sewers is constitutional.
Although very large share of citi-
zens, professedly interested in the ques-
| tion, We're out OF town, the meeting was
extremely well attended and the various
features Of the question were closely
canvassed
Among those present were Mark M.
Cleaver, Samuel f. Belts, Phillip Plum
kctt, j. Augustus McCaulley, Council
man James Murray, James A. McCaul-
ley, j. 4. II. Montgomery, George H.
Bates, D. Il. Smyth, John S. Rossell,
Caleb ?. johnson, Joseph Il. Carpenter,
Jr., Charles w. Rowland, James M.
Bryan, J. D. Winslow, Ezra Fell, A. S.
Reed, William Bright, A. j. Woodman,
Frank Simmons.
On the motion of Mr.. McCaulley, Mr..
Cleaver was elected chairman and John
S. Rossell secretary.
Mr.. Cleayer stated the purpose of the
meeting and added that there exists
among the citizens an honest difference
of opinion rs to whether this tax should
! be paid by the abutting properties or BY
general taxation as other public expen
ditures are. The understanding is that
it is preferable to test the question by
amicable action, to put forward test
lien case, rather than have any conten.
ton with the department,
There was a general expression
among those present Of appreciation of
the great improvements carried on by
the Street and Sewer Department. Tho
necessity Of the new sewerage system
was fully conceded. The only point,
as stated, was the constitutionality of
the departments method Of collecting
the assessment.
Mr.. McCaulley offered resolution
that committee Of three be appointed
to ascertain what the cost of legal
opinion on the question would be, the.
committee TO report at next meeting.
Mr.. johnson did not see the necessity
of consulting counsel. He thought
action in stated case upon the assess
ment question would include the opinion
and define the legal phase of it.
Chairman Cleayer inquired of the
audience whether anyone present had
given his case into the hands Of counsel.
There was no response.
Mr.. Plunkett expressed himself as
emphatically opposed to the manner of
paying the sewer assessment.
Mr.. NIcCaulley-"The Street and
Sewer Department is only doing what
il does under the law There is no diff
ference with them. What the public
wants to know is if one man pays for
his sewer rights whether the next man
can be made to pay"
Ezra Fell expressed himself as per-
ceiying no Justice in the law.
Mr.. Carpenter asked the chairman
what the cost of entering private sewers
is. The reply was, for Shipley street
sewer, $2.15 per lineal foot front on
abutting properties; on West street
sewer it is S2.55. There is no charge
on lot area
In reply to MIR. Plunkett the chair
explained certain case where he (Mr.
Cleaver) on certain house property of
his own has TO pay for two sewers on
the street where his property is located.
He had already paid TO enter the private
sewer laid there by Mr. Ford. Subso-
quently the department laid a sewer on
the opposite side of the street. Now he
has to pay for that also.
The sewer tax law is 80 cents Der
Inca! foot front and cent per square
foot for the area of abutting properties
based on the measurements Of frontand
depth, but in no case is there depth
measurement calculation of over 15lI
feet.
A. S. Reed thought that a LAWYERS
opinion would not affect the constitu-
tionality of the question one way or the
other. He was in favor Of test case
being tried in the courts.
Caleb T.. johnson did not see any uss
in employing counsel. His idea was to
await the result OF the dcpartment's
action in suing some one.
Mr.. McCauliey wanted to see a, s.a,, I,
90 to q court that would decide without
a doubt. when there would be no need
for appcai.
A. s. Reed was in favor Of an ami
cable test case. He did not want to Sec
the Street and Sewer Department mt to
the cxpcnse of prosecuting citizens.
One Of the audience here aot M and
anprilv comrlained Of n bilI for Si1e he
had lust received from the Department
for a LOT that was not inproved. He
had owned il for 20 years
Tie motion for the appoiutment of a
committee OF three. who arc ID ronort
iNbf EfNs n