Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1893-10-04

pare the articles, remarkinp ma
bers We're familiar with lie ca.
Alderman Spoonts said thei
mittee could merely draft he
Impeachment, that il devolyed
council to set the day Of trial
9lr. Burns of the fact.
Alderman Spoonts raised III,
whether Mr.. Burns could be
for more than one week.
Alderman Nicks said be IL
'iyor could continue 10 n.
Burns until the council Should
lh.s opinion prevailed, and
re-appolntel the present acting
until Mr.. Burs' case was \
definitely, The mayor and 4
committee We're empowered
action regarding the ,lssistaH; )
bond.
A petition tlmt NJ. $. Ca
Pointed II special policeman On
Houston streets, not 10 be IL
city, was referred to the b
uittee.
y petition from Q. NJ. Carb
be appointed city secretary wa
and filed without acton.
A resolution that an ah
placed ut the crossing of n
orado and Santa Fe railway "a
street, was referred to the VI
committee.
The next resolution presented
that provoked much discussion
III effect, that the city will not
aiy receipt signed by any one ,
the secretary of the waterman
MI. Drake, who presented
ton, asked for lis immediate
ton, without reference TO az
Mr.. Nicks thought the resor
to be referred to the waterwl
mittee, and on this issue a heat
ensued between Messrs. NJ
Drake. Though the debate bes
question whether the resolution
considered without referenee, Il
sumed a wide range and lerel
Il lively argument of Official hVi
Mr., Drake thought II was a p
ness proposition, one On which
ell could act inteiligentIy witho
from the waterworks committed
derstoOd that men, who ware {
bond to the city, were collec.ll
rents, and he thought only the
who was accountable to the eli
collect them. 1t was not neesi
water consumers to be soughl
their bills; if they didn't pay It'd.
~, the water should be cut =
law commands.
Alderman Nicks said he th1l
adoption of the resolution woHl
bad effect. 1t seemed TO him 10 bep
policy to ease matters along a
instead Of taking such action = z
duce the revenue from this ~arf.
Alderman Mes said DIE niliei
TO his attention in mNnei N.
pehed him to take notice o. y
dertuud that a certain oiiicaf u /
partmeilt LAID all his woes z, \
of another officer in that ~;
who was not boaleI Atloai
was not a w0sJ of truth ~ Pc.
atious, there should be such q Ilss
of methods as would make hHN'
impossible.
The question was then uiken :
man Nicks' motiOl 10 refer me Il
to the wnterworss cJmEnlttee 4 ap /.
ton WIS lost by a vote OF "
Ths question then rccurre1 y
luton Itself, but before the wy
put, Alderman Nicks took w \
the resolution, think.nss n
ton unnecessary and undc<IssEt
Alderman Spoonts ddvoc1tN =
also Alderman M0ntgoney'
Alderman Mics offered 81 ~
the secretary TO hAfs
or, wllj sllnl be under bond Az
soon rs aI'rangenients SAP y y
have all water dues paid ni
tary's Office. This amaldinsa
10 all and, with alni
brakes rcs Cis'lou WIS idop,ss..
A resolution by Alderman y
/ lSo adopted instructiag the ~
missioner to lay O gravel or N
wall; on Hemphill street IRON
to Magnolia.
A resolution was adopted u si I,
instructing the secretary to W.
rants of city officers, agsiqss "
claims were presented, nnu, \
instructions from the council Y
disposition should be made q
resolution. in effect, forbi1s "
TO cash warrants aud 10 dlsi1e X
council reserying this righI y
The report Of the city ensl.ls7i
that eleven building pernps y
issued during the month 81 r.
was received and fled.
The claim Of j. j SuiilYnn:
city to reimburse him for W.
reason Of being Injuries u N
runaway team belonging y
was then taken up, Alderig9atn 4
Ing that the vote by whlr1
ton granting his petition N@
the last meeting, be ree0llin',f
petition was granted. but va,
Il. A reconsiderauos
d, and, after some dlseassle'a
ton WIS passed over the ~
- -