The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-04-09
THE ALTERED RESOLUTION.
Thomas r. Shepard Tells What He
Knows of the Matter.


SEATTLE, April 8, 1892
To THE EDITOR: IN the news columns of
your Issue of this date there appears a narrative
seaeement purporsng to give the history OF the
Iesoiutlon authorizing the comptroller to adrer-
tise for bids for the city bonds as to a supposed
alteration OF which. after its passage there has
zen nome inq uiTy and discussion during this
week. The statement in that narrative that
There Is no doubt that Thomas f. Shepard
made the changes In the resolution. but it is
equaliy certain that they were not legally con-
nrned, and the original resolution remained in
run force, Implies, in connection with what
precedes, that made changes in the resolution
after it was passed Ii has not been my prac-
tiee TO tampe- with the text of such legislative
documents as l have had the honor to submit 10
the city council for its action after the councils
action upon them In justice to myself, permit
me 70 state what l have had to do with that
resolution
As had charge, as SPECIAL counsel for the
city, OF preparing all the documents necessary
70 authorize the issue OF the bozds, down to and
including the conh-metory ordinances passed
after the favorable popular vote on the proposi-
IONS, II was suggested to me about a week after
tne election ether by the city comptroller OF
some otner msnoer OF the city government,
that prepare resolution o. ordinance author
ling the comptroller TO advertise for bids
was unaware OF the b-ief resolution to that eject
winch had been passed on February 30 and that
mad been premstu-eiy PASSED anyway being be-
lore any bonds were authorized by the election
me me comptroller showed me draft of the cir
GUAR that he was about 20 have printed, explain
atory o, tae proposed Issues and calling for bids
Tat trst Graft called, as did the printed circu.
la.s wards issued for bids on before April
., ana required the deposit with each bid of q
certified cheek for s5,c00. Accordingly, drafted
JOINT resolution conformably TO the intended
circular, and took II to the city hall during the
latter part OF the session of both houses held on
the evening OF Monday, March a. On entering
the delegates chamber, and asking a membs. to
Introduce the resolution, ! was told that an
ordinance to the same effect had already been
passed in that house that evening l did not
see the text OF the ordinance, but suggested
that II had better be passed through the other
mouse on the same evening, so as TO hasten the
beginning OF the advertisement for bids; and I
Kept my draft OF a resolution in my wn hands.
lew minutes later the board of aldermen ad-
journed till one or two evenings later, ana the
house of delegates till still later in the week: SO
that 1t became impossible to have the passage of
the ordinance competed, have it authenticated,
after passage by both houses by the signature
of the president OF each house affixed in open
session, and have 1t go to the mayor for ap-
proval, till the latter part of the week.
Wien the board of aldermen reconvened, a
day or two later Il write without opportunity
10 refer 10 the records for exact dates), | was
present, and was then first shown the ordinance
that had passed the other house. On examining
II found that. owing to uufamiliarity with the
bond ordinances on the part of the person who
had prepared that ordinance, it referred to the
bonds as authorized by ordinance No. 1,ee5.
while in point of fact none OF the bonds had
been authorized by that ordinance, but the sew
eral blocks had been authorized by six ordi-
nances, Nos. l,967 to 1872 inclusive. On this &C.
count suggested to the city clerk, Just before
the session OF the board of aldermen began,
that the ordinance had better be rejected and
the resolution that had drafted, which had
then with me and which referred generally to
all the bonds authorized at the election, had
ss the be bes ~ay o do He we 9S be
to have some member. when the ordinance
came up, move to refer 1t to the finance COM
mittee and have the finance committee report
back my resolution as a substitute. This was
doue, Mr.. Korn moving, at my suggestion, to
refer the ordinance. then handed to Mr.. Pom
titus. chairman of the finance committee nv
draft OF a resolution and asked him to report it
as a substitute, explaining why. AS l had
drafted the resolution 1t called for the bids TO
come in by April f. but before Mr.. Pontius got
ready to report back the resolution l called him
aside and suggested that as the failure to PASS
an ordinance or resolution OF authority on Mon
day evening had shortened by several days the
time remaining before April it might be we'll
to change the date for the bids to come in to the
18th, ana as be made no objection to this took
the resolution ana then and there changed the
date from the 4.h to the 18th. At the same time
Iinterlined in pencil, in two three places,
some phraseoogy that seemed to me to improve
the text of the resolution; these are the
''interlinestions OF technical character" that
your paper refers to. After making all these
changes l handed the resolution back to Mr.
Pontius, and IL was reported by him sub
stitute for the ordinance, which was thus
killed, read TO the board, and passed by il in
precisely the form N which it now stands, in
ending the requirement. of check for 5000
with each bid, except that it called for bids on
or before April II instead OF April as it now
appears of record.
At the next session of the house of delegates
while was p-esent, member of that house
came to me and complained that the resolution
did not require large enough deposit with each
bid, and he must insist on fuller guarantee of
good faith from bidders. He said that deposit
of s5,00D with bid for any one of the six blocks,
or OF $1,000 with bid for them all, was the
lowest that he could consent to. and that he
should have the resolution amended accord
ingly. l told him that in that case he
had better get the resolution from the
ala dab LAT fah h
the text of the amendment He brought it to
me and we agreed on the phra seology as to the
deposit with bids, and wrote il in pencil on
the resolution. Soon after, and before the reso-
luton came up for acton in the house, Il lett
the city hall ami returned to my Office, when
found there a printed copy Of the comptroller's
circular, which had not supposed was to be
issued till its authorization by the council was
complete CHANGING hastily at the circular |
noticed that IT called for deposit of Only 5000
with any bid; but did not notice that II speci-
fed April as the date. teephoned 1T once ID
the city clerks office that, as the c5inptToller's
circular was already out, the resolution ought
not to he changed by calling for u larger deposit
In any case than $5.c1a. but ought to remain
il had passed the board of aldermen, so us TO
conform 10 the circular / at the ciIS
clerks office the next day, when he submitted
TO me the drait of the resolution and asked me
TO erase the proposed amendment as to the size
of the deposit that had noted on il, as above
stated, which did. This was before authenti.
cation of the resolution by signatures, and left
ii In precisely the shape in which 1t had passed
date specified. In what shape it had passed the
house OF delegates / do not know for, as stated,
was not present when II was read
supposed that the time for bids 70
till April IL, until the Sd inst, when hsppene
for the first time to read the advertisement for
bids in your paper, and noticed that IT named
April t. The next morning teiephoued to the
COMPTROLLER aud asked how that happened, as
the resolution had prescribed the nth as the
date. He replied that his circular had been
already printed naming the ith as the date be-
fore the resolution passed, ana as u was not
strictly necessary that the call Tor bids should
be author zed by legislation he had gone ahead
with the matter rs II was. Later on the 18th
been altered since it, passage so as TO name the
=th instead OF the llth, and went 10 the city
clerks Office and examined both the original
draft o! the resolution, which nad iuralshed;
and the record OF il in the proper booA, aud
found that in the record as well as the paper
resolution the date had been written as The
nth, and had afterwards been written over as
the ain.
Whoever made that alteration OF the date. II
was none of nv doing. as have fully explained,
nor had any idea that 1t had been done until l
learned IL as above stated on Monday OF TINS
week. But in justice 10 all concerned let lns
cay IN conclusion that whi.e sHeh an alteration
OF the text OF any legislative act after It's enact
lneut is very irregular. ii was no doubt done
without wrong intention and oaiy foz the SAKE
OF making the authorization OF tho c1mptroLlets
call couiorm TO what the call actually was.
And further, the " hole matter under discussion
has no bearing on the validity of the sale OF the
bonds. Under the statute OF this state ana the
charter of the city, well the express text Of
the bond ordinances. ihe city couneii
has pienary power IN the waole matter
OF disposition OF the bonds II could sell
them .'in such manner, FOR such price, on such
terms, 10 such person or persons, aud at such
time or times anu either altogether or IN dii-
ferent blocks ~ il might deem for the city
k..sf frs