The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-03-09
ELECTRIC-LIGHT TAX.

Brush Company Takes Advantage OF a CIer-
ical MIDDLE and Refuses to Pay 1t.
Matters relating to the Der cent. of gross
receipts the Brush company Is required to
pay into the city treasury again cropped
out yesterday. Some time ago Controller
WoOllen discovered. as he claimed, that
the Brush company should have paid in
pig per cent. of its gross receipts for 1891.
He based this claim upon the reading of
the ordinance. which plainly says that the
part relating to the payment of q per cent.
to the city shall not affect the Brush COM
pany until after the expiration of its con-
tract with the city. to-wit. Dec. 81. 1891.
Now everybody knows there is screw
loose here; that the contract expired Dec.
81, 1850. else why did the Brush company
turn out It's lights at that timer Mr. Wool
len wrote n letter to Mr.. Caven asking
him To settle with the city, and be put tne
matter IN the hands of ex-City Attorney
Taylor. attorney for the company. Yester-
day Mr.. W Oollen received the following let
ter from President Caven:
Dear sir-Yours OF Feb. Is received. I did
not believe the city entitled TO q special tax for
1891, but referred your letter to Mr.. Taylor to
investigate. L inclOse his opinion, in which he
sustains our view. Intimation was made of
something suspicious in reference TO changes in
the ordinance: His opinion utterly refutes this
for lighting (beiEg several times the tax III duel
was left III your hands and still is there. Please
indicate what further is necessary on our part.
Mr.. Tay lors opinion. which was also at
tached. contained the following statement:
General ordinance No. Ia. 1SSS, was intro
duced In Council Sept. IL, 1888, and was an in
candescent lighting ordinance or eight sections
only, and passed the Council Sept. 20. IL then
went To the Board OF Aldermen. and on Nov. 10,
az its second reading, President Granville s.
wright offered extended amendments covering
the entire subject OF arc lighting and electric
power as we'll as incandescent lighting
These amendments we're partly written with pen
and partly typewriter, all the written part be-
ing in the hand writing of President
Wright written exactly as the board
desired IL written and exactly as they
passed, no other amendments or changes
ever afterward being made in the ordinance.
either In the Board of Aldermen or the Common
Council. On Nov. ~ the Board of Aldermen
adopted the ordinance as amended. The Com
mon Council the same day coneurred in the ac-
ton OF the Board OF Aldermen. The or
dinance was engrossed and passed in type-writ-
ten form, exactly as IL appears now, without a
single change, erasure, interneation or mark of
any kind or character thereon. and was duly and
properly signed by all the officers being signed
nine different times by the different officers re-
quired TO sign the ordinances. The provision
relating 10 your company appears, plainly
printed. at two different places IN the pro-
ceedfDgs, and in the engrossed ordinance,
as signed by the proper officers, exactly the
Common Council and Board OF Aldermen intend
ed IL should be. BY that provision the percent
age OF the gross receipts due from your company
Is 10 he computed from the Ist day of January
1892. General ordinance No. Al. as originally
drawn. did not apply 10 the Brush company at
all. either III terms or IN scope, for the reason
that II related 10 ineandescent lighting only. The
Brush company for che first time was referred To
Ia the amendments submitted by President
Wright They were carefully considered
and wisely Incorporated into general ordinance
No. A SO that the whole subject OF electric light