The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1892-09-24
FIFTH EDITION.



Some Opposition TO Going ON with 70
Without Knowing Whore the Money
Is to Come From.
After the adjournment OF tho morn
Ing session of the Levy Court yester-
day the committee on building Wash.
ington street bridge across the Bran
DIVINE held a meeting and transacted
some business. 1t soon developed
that Messrs. Buckingham and Jolls
were not In hearty sympathy with
going on with the bridge unless 1t was
plainly shown where the money was
To come from with which to build 1t.
The iir5t business transacted was the
approving of the bond OF the Delaware
Construction Company, given for $780,
600 for the faithful performance OF its
duty. The suretie5 were John A.
Cranston and Samuel Ii. Baynard.
80 me slight changes in tho plan OF
the bridge were agreed upon by the
committee at tho suggestion of Albert
Lucius. the New YORK engineer
Instead of iilling In the south side
with earth small span will DO placed
there. The bridge will also be run a
little OFF the line first agreed upon In
order more to avoid the intercepting
sewer and south long race on one side
and the race and railroad on the north
side.
1t seems that the contract for build
ing the bridge has been signed by the
whole seven of the committee except
Buckingham and Jolls. The position
OF these gentlemen, however. will
make no material difference in the
committee but II in the meeting of the
Levy Court two other members stand
with them they can block the payment
OF bills, as two-third vote Is required
| to pnss them.
When the Levy Court met In the
afternoon. the bridge question came
up by by Mr.. Clark moving that the
attorney OF tho court DO asked for
written opinion as to whether the
court had any right to go on with the
building of tho bridge without any APP
preparation having been made for 1t,
and Mr.. ellis seconded the motion.
The motion was bombshell in the
Court, and Mr.. Grub thought that
such question should come before
full court and moved that the matter
be laid over until the next meeting.
The chair decided the motion carried,
but division was called for.
Then IL was discovered TINT the
court was without a clerk, when MIR.
Hutchinson went and hunted up deputy
Nicholson and business was resu med.
Mr.. Clark then repeated his motion.
Mr. Grubb with a dlsgusted counte-
nunce asked Mr.. Clark II this WIS not
pretty time for such a motion when
pnrt OF the bridge was built.
81 have notion to make n motion
that 1t 10 indefinitely postponed" said
the irate member, but he simply moved
that Mr. Clark's motion DO laid over
until the next meeting, and upon that
he called for tho ayes and nays,
| Chairman Buckingham said IL was
not worth while to ask his opinion, as
he did not believe the court would
have money enough to build the
bridge
Tho vote resulted ms follows on MIR.
Grubb's molten to lay Mr.. Clarks mo-
ton on the table: Ayes, Buckingham.
Grubb, Hickman, Hutchinson. killgore,
Sutton @. Nays, Clark, Eliason,
ellis, Jolls-4. Mr.. Jolls, In order to
explain his position said no was a
member OF the bridge committee, but
was not In accord with the committee.
He could not sign the contract b5cau 80
he did not bolleve they had the funds
to do the work. He could not go be-
yond the restrictions placed by the
law. The court had not the right to
make debt without specific appro-
paiatlon to pay 1t. 1t could not Dor.
row In excess of $4,000 except In ex-
traordlnary cases, us tho visitation OF
destruction. He could see his way
clear to the expenditure OF $40, 900 OF
$50, 900, but he could not gee above
that.
Mr.. Jolls then asked to be excused
from serving on the committee, as ho
could not agree with the other mem.
bers, and 1t was matter of conscien-
tlous objection to going on with the
bridge.
excused from serving on the commit
tee, and Mr.. ellis seconded the mo-
ton.
Mr.. Hutchinson vigorously opposed
exGusing Mr.. Jolls, as he had great
faith In his tinaEceerlng ability. The
committee was about rs good q one as
could he obtained, and there was no
great harm II Mr.. Jolls did not agree
with all the committee did.
Mr.. Grubb also opposed accepting
Mr.. Jolls' resignation, and tho motion
to EXCUSE Mr.. Jolls was lost.
Mr.. Joseph Dean ON the part of the
country election inspectors OF tho
court and stated that the inspectors
had decided upon the Husbands booth,
which costa about sl6eaeh. Mr. Dean
asked that the court grant orders for
the booths and that orders also be
drawn for one days work for those
Inspectors who had obeyed the request
to attend the court.
The orders were passed. Mr.. Jolls
suggested tnat when the inspectors
complete their work at the coming
election they at once make out tho
names Of the owners OF the polling
places, 80 that the court may know to
whom to make the orders for their
rental payable.
On motion of Mr. Grubb tho court
adjourned until Tuesday, October 4th.