Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-03-12
To Be SIGNED TODAY
Gourley Will Attach His Auto.
graph to the Appropri-
alton Ordinance,
BUT ENTERS A PROTEST.
Not Over 100000 Should Have Been
Expended on the Parks.
THE TAX BOOKS IN GOOD SHAPE.
official Valuations in Wards That We're
Previously Estimated.
BUT ENTERS A PROTEST.
THE TAX BOOKS IN GOOD SHAPE.
A POINT RAISED on AN APPOINTMENT

The appropriation ordinance for 1892 viii
be submitted to Mayor Gourley by the City
Clerk this morning, and, as stated in yester
days DISPATCH, he will sign it at once,
though he will probably write public let
ter in connection with it stating his reasons
for so doing. The Mayor is not entirely sat.
isfed with the ordinance. He thinks the
park appropriation should have been re-
duced to $1,000 and that the SIS, 600 fol
the purchase Of land for Highland Park
should have been struck out.
But he SAYS it is important to have the
matter settled at once in order that the col
lection of taxes may begin, and that the
taxpayers will have an opportunity to get
the per cent discount allowed those who
pay the whole years taxes in March. He
saws the books should have been opened for
collections on the 1st inst, and he thinks
that if he should veto the ordinance accord
ing to his inclination it would only cause
delay without accomplishing any real bene-
fit to anyone.
The Tax Books iu shape.
The assessors have the tax books in such
shape that as soon as the Mayor signs the
ordinance a force of clerks can be put to
work and by working night and day have
the books for six or eight wards ready for
the City Treasurer's Office by Monday morn
ing. This will be done in order to accom-
modate the public. The assessors are still
working on the Fourteenth and Twenty
second ward revisions and expect to COM
plete them next week.
oF ba
Office, yesterday, completed the addition of
total gross valuations in the Eighteenth,
Twentieth and Twenty-frst wards. These
are three of the wards in which the assessors
were only able to furnish estimates of the
valuation when they submitted their report
10 Councils last Monday week. The actual
figures are widely different from the esti-
mates, particularly in the Twentieth ward,
and are based on the new classification rule
recently adopted bv the Board.
In the Eighteenth ward the completed
figures show the full taxable property to be
s.. 0I6 504: rural, 81, 104, 9s9; agricultural,
$685. 19s; personal, S9, $50; total, S., ,S19, 81.
The assessors estimated valuation total was
S.. 1s7. .554, of which S2,255, ,2S9 was full,
60, 352, Gas was rural, S543, ,677 agricultural
and S35, $40 personal. The increase over
the valuation of 1891 was Is per cent
NO Agricultural SlaSS lnere.
In the Twentieth ward the full taxable
iootS up $40, 49,, ,S77; rural, 81, 722 ,5S1; the
agricultural classification is wiped out; per
sonal, S65, 43O; total, S23. go, SSS. The total
valuation in the assessors estimate was S25.-
CSC, O9S, of which s., ,969, us was full, s1S,-
ia, 6S3 rural, S669, ,367 agricultural, and
$50 900 personal The increase over the
1891 valuation is Sc per cent.
In the First district of the Twenty-frst
ward, the full taxable foots up 50, 137, Isl;
rural, s., ,9s2, ass; agricultural, S458, S93; per-
sonal, S20,470 total, sc, 59S, 499. The as
SCISSORS estimate fixed the total valuation at
Sc, 574, 542, of which s., $50, ,017 was full, s3,
922, ia rural, S641, S11 agricultural and $780,,
OG0 personal The increase over the 1891
valuation is 50 per cent. In the Second
district the full taxable is 81 400. .912; rural,
S3.121 ,027: agricultural, S491, GAG; personal,
81. .e75; total, S5.115, $50. The estimate
gave total of S., ,o42, 1898, of which
$3.50, ,7o6 was full, 81, 152,o76 rural, S294, 1856
agricultural and So, 925 personal. The in
crease over the valuation of 1891 was 50 per
cent.
1t is understood that the Mayor has noti-
fed the City Treasurer, the Chief of Public
Works and the Chief of Public Safety that
they each have employees in their offices
who are non-residents and who must be
taken from the city payroll Ine mayor
would not give any explanation and refused
10 say whether he had taken such or not.
Question on an Appointment.
In this connection a question was raised
yesterday over the appointment by City At
torney Moreland of ex-Judge Charles Fet-
terman to the vacancy in the city attorneys
Office made vacant by the resignation as
assistant city attorney of the present Dis
trict Attorney Burleigh. The appointment
was approved by the Finance Committee,
but has not been confirmed by Councils,
and the question raised is that Mr.. Fetter-
man is not and never has been a resident
of the city. being at present a resident of
Allegheny, and therefore not eligible.
The Mayor was the first to think of the
matter, and he called on Major Moreland
about it. The Major, however, produced
the ordinance creating the position of As
sistant District Attorney and showed that it
did not require residence in the city, only
that the appointee should be member of
the county bar in good standing. This sat-
isfed the Mayor and he is pleased with
Judge Fetterman's appointment. The legal
advisors of the city, including Mr.. Fetter-
man, who is an assistant, are City Attorney
Moreland and assistants, Thomas Carnahan